: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=wAQGmFOh,comment-id=001a000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-24T13:55:49.966+0000) > > Ah, now we are finally talking! > No, I obviously wasnt lying, I just explained again what I meant with the "106g lost in cost efficency (no CDR or manareg)", > but I see now that this can be interpreted the wrong way! I have changed it to "loss of a total of 106g worth of stats (ontop not I didn't interpret it in the wrong way. You LITERALLY SAID >(So we take the lost 106g from the 1400g and end up with 1294 total Gold saved) >Nope, its a 1000g ~~safe~~save at best, once you hit Tier 3 Typo fixed. You did the math said you save 1294 gold. Then said you save 1000g at the most. Then when called out about it you denied it. This is called lying.
Okay, I granted you that there may have been a missunderstanding , but this comment of yours proves that you didnt even bother to read the whole thing.... This clearly explains the numbers! >Sidenote: The 1400g is technically only 1230g and 1294g saved from the raw stats, but this is even less since we have worse gold generation before the final upgrade. By rough approximation you should have about 200-300g less gold once you hit the final upgrade(20-24min). Meaning you save only 1000g and have now virtually no more gold income, but technically you are missing stats which you had before and need to invest gold again to get them back (like 10%cdr= 266g, 200% hpReg = 600g, 50% mana reg = 250g). Thus the 1000g saved, is in reality partly a shifted towards other stats, and not just purely saved 1000g, keep that in mind. Another important note is, that often you didnt upgrade the frostfang, and to a much lesser degree targons, because the upgrade doesnt bring you much. You would rather have your first item 1000g sooner! So you didnt save 1400g on your first item, you only save 450g! And as mentioned, the old tier 2 upgrade was much better and had better gold generation, so it is not even 450g that you save. And this even ignores the loss of the passive damage and shared healing, meaning we need to reduce the "1000g" saved even more! (by aproximation ~450g for the relic line ( a dorans Shield) and ~435g -- 500g (buying AP to counter the 15/18dmg loss) So before you accuse me of lying, **again**, please read the whole thing! I have explained these numbers and how I deducted them. (and also never assume from the start, that the other person has an illintend, give the benefit of the doubt first! The other person could just have made an error…., accussing them doesnt help to keep a discussion rational)
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=wAQGmFOh,comment-id=001a0000,timestamp=2019-11-23T23:43:29.050+0000) > > **1) ** > It seems that you didnt fully understand what I was talking about. So lets clear things up: > I am trying to determine if this change was a buff or a nerf, so I am comparing the stats of the items. > > So the new item costs 400g and gives a total of 1705g stats, the old item was 1800g and gave 1811g worth of stats (ignoring the passive for now) > This means if we compare having the old item vs having the new item we end up with: 1400g saved, but we have lost 106g worth of stats. > (So we take the lost 106g from the 1400g and end up with** 1294 total Gold saved)** Oh so you're saying you were lying in this part then? >TL;DR: >Arguments: Pros: >- ~~save 1400g because of the free upgrade~~ Nope,** its a 1000g safe at best**, once you hit Tier 3 >3) You have got something wrong, the gp10 passive doesnt shut off once you reach the 1000g treshhold, but +1gp10 and +2gp10 is an utter joke compared to a 22gp10 and 33.5gp10 loss! You didn't understand my comment. The old gold per 10 used to count towards your 1000 quest gold. This is no longer true. Meaning the 200+ gold per 10 you earn while doing the quest doesn't count towards the 1000 gold before the quest shuts off the passives. Either way you're gaining 1000+ gold of combat stats for a slightly nerfed early game and an trivial amount of gold loss after you got 3+ items and 90% of games are already over anyways. That's a buff
>Oh so you're saying you were lying in this part then? Ah, now we are finally talking! No, I obviously wasnt lying, I just explained again what I meant with the "106g lost in cost efficency (no CDR or manareg)", but I see now that this can be interpreted the wrong way! I have changed it to "loss of a total of 106g worth of stats (ontop not having CDR or manareg)" This should make it clear enough now. ----------------------------------- >Assuming the we finish the tier 2 support at 9 mins and the tier 3 at 18 mins that means the passive actually shuts off at 1270 gold. > The old gold per 10 used to count towards your 1000 quest gold. This is no longer true. Meaning the 200+ gold per 10 you earn while doing the quest doesn't count towards the 1000 gold before the quest shuts off the passives But this is not the problem, sure, you may get a full 1000g from the passive and addtional a +1gp10 now, but the overall gold generation is still lower. And you will lose gold later on, a lot of gold! It is far from a trival amount! I also heavily disagree about the "just a slight nerf", as stated ist not as much of a free stat boost in the early, a worse stat change, and an overall big stat loss, specifically looking at the passive changes, and lastly worse gold generation. Having your 1st item aprox 2 min eariler (or ~<450g earlier) but a the cost of weaker stats and a worse early and only a minor stat buff around 20-24min, falling off harder every minute after, on a role that was already weak in the late to beginn with, is not enough for me to even out all the drawbacks, far from calling it a buff. You can personally still view it as a buff, if you want, but that is up to everyone themselfs. This Analysis, in the end, was a break down of the changes, and to clear up the resulting consequences.
: I'm just gonna cover SOME of the factually inaccuracies and fallacies of your argument, no opinions at the start(until the end) Starting with the big one, you state >Tier 3: >Spellthief line: {{item:3853}} / >1400g cost saved > **106g lost in cost efficency** (no CDR or manareg) This statement is absurdly wrong. The cost of the Tier 3 Item is only 400 gold. The Tier 3 Support items are more then 2-1/2 times as gold efficient as any other item in the game Gold Value 60 ability power = Gold 1305 150 health = Gold 400 Total Gold Value = Gold 1705 Gold Efficiency* Shard of True Ice item Shard of True Ice is 426.25% gold efficient without its active. Under cons you listed "worse gold generation" This is false. Both tier 1 support items generate more gold. Spellthief's line is worse at tier 2. But you don't have to back to upgrade it, which often means in an actual game it ends up being better. Since the tier 1 for the new line is +4 gold per hit. Relic line is strictly better at tier 1 and 2. Multiple times you state that the Current version of the items shut off the passive after 1000g. However every time you omit that the passive gold per 10 no longer counts towards that 1000g. Assuming the we finish the tier 2 support at 9 mins and the tier 3 at 18 mins that means the passive actually shuts off at 1270 gold. You assumed perfect gold generation late off the support passives. This is clearly never happening. You won't be generating passive gold while dead recalled ect. Now time for MY OPINION Your refuse to accept the basic facts of the matter. Including the most important one. Which is that cost efficiency is going through the roof. Your opinion can be safely discarded as it isn't based on facts but rather your emotions. The new support items are normally nerfed pre-first back, supports that prefer the new support items types are even buffed before first back. Support are still more important then ADC in the early lane phase. After first back they're buffed for literally everyone They have a massive buff in the mid game around the time Baron is spawning. Which is generally the most important time of the game. The spike is so massive the Support is often ahead of the JG and laners in combat stats at the most important time of the game. Super late the support items are slightly nerfed, but this comes at a time when you're running out of inventory space and losing 400-500 g between min 37 and 42 is massively overblown and basically meaningless. New support items are literally god tier broken. Support kinda sucks on the current patch anyway because solo laners are 4 levels above you and one shot you way to easy.
**1) ** It seems that you didnt fully understand what I was talking about. So lets clear things up: I am trying to determine if this change was a buff or a nerf, so I am comparing the stats of the items. So the new item costs 400g and gives a total of 1705g stats, the old item was 1800g and gave 1811g worth of stats (ignoring the passive for now) This means if we compare having the old item vs having the new item we end up with: 1400g saved, but we have lost 106g worth of stats. (So we take the lost 106g from the 1400g and end up with 1294 total Gold saved) Thats how I got these numbers, BUT these are just the raw stats and this needs some further adjustments because of the lost passive dmg, lower gold gen etc. I hope this clears things up. --------------------------- **2)** No, I did not base my statements regarding the worse gold generation on my opionion, but on facts. > Under cons you listed "worse gold generation" > This is false. Both tier 1 support items generate more gold. > Spellthief's line is worse at tier 2. But you don't have to back to upgrade it, which often means in an actual game it ends up being better. Since the tier 1 for the new line is +4 gold per hit. Relic line is strictly better at tier 1 and 2. I agree that the new Tier 1 spellthief has better gold generation, but I clearly stated this in the post. The relic Tier 1 is debatable, because it has +1gp10, but also generates new charges 5 seconds slower. But the old Tier 2 versions, costing 450g, are clear and without a doubt much better at generating gold, than the new versions! (And I have included the +1gp10/+2gp10 buffs into this statment already!) This 450g should be available everytime at the first back, meaning at ~4-6mins into the game. I woud be more than happy to accept that this is wrong, **if** you can prove that these are false statments! _________ **3)** You have got something wrong, the gp10 passive doesnt shut off once you reach the 1000g treshhold, but +1gp10 and +2gp10 is an utter joke compared to a 22gp10 and 33.5gp10 loss! And I never stated that these are the **normal** values, but rather the maximum possible ones! BUT even if we would just assume half these numbers, we still talk about a 10x and 7x Gold income increase, compared to the gp10 buff. Also remember that we can store up to 3 and 4 stacks respectivly, so a recall or even a death doesnt necessary mean that you lose gold income. I hope this cleared up some missunderstands, but if I am truely mistaken and have presented errorious facts, please correct me and prove it! So it would help to keep the discussion fact focused.
gileskd (NA)
: look good to me, but some minor corrections opposide ----> opposite safe ----> save Sidenode -----> sidenote safed -----> saved
Done and edited^^ If you find anymore, or other big grammar mistakes that would break the reading flow, please let me know! Thank you very much!
: Let's settle this once and for all! Is the support item change a buff or a nerf? - An Analysis -
**FEEDBACK FOR SPELLING & GRAMMER MISTKES HERE!** Please let me know about spelling and grammar mistakes here, or if something sounds off! So I can improve the reability of the Analysis. Thank you very much! :D
: Another point is basically no one got tier 3 versions of support items, especially the frostfang line So really not as much gold saved as they advertised, except for those long games where you had your 5 items and had nothing to buy except support upgrade
I tried to include this inside the "sidenode" part in the Tier 3 overview :D You didnt purchase tier 3 frostfang item, but the relic line Tier 3 was bought often enough, because it gave better stats and an even better gold generation^^
: Let's settle this once and for all! Is the support item change a buff or a nerf? - An Analysis -
hmm why did this analysis get 2 downvotes already, if all it has done was to look at the math behind it, and no one said anything negativ so far? Or that I did something wrong/overlooked something! I guess people must be afraid of math or dont even have time to read a TL;DR :/
Comentários de Rioters
Lost R (NA)
: I'm seeing something consistent in all the games that are lost.
Well its much easier to destroy the enemy nexus, when the enemys are dead ;D :'D Just saying :P {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}}
: i wonder when people will realize that buying resists vs a tank makes them invulnerable to tanks mercs > ornn won't be able to kill you anymore tabi > poppy and mundo will start struggling a lot these champions don't buy penetration so any forms of resist cuts their damage significantly don't be fools and buy sustain buy some resist and then focus on farming as you would most likely outscale
shhh let him have his rant! Dont you dare make viable remarks and god forbid even show him already existing solutions to his problems!
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=V3dw5g88,comment-id=000a0000,timestamp=2019-11-21T17:33:35.980+0000) > > You dont seem to know who to interpret these statistics, but hey atleast tried to look up statistics! Thats a good start. > > Lets begin: > - 1. you are looking at the highest winrate champs, and they win means they get assists means they get lots of gold which is not tide to the passive. > - 2. There are not that many games currentely where they even get the 4th item. (its was every 4 th game, now its every only 6th game for janna or every 7th to 10th game for naut) Still far better than the small number of games anyone player has played for judging the state of things. And item completion times on support don't really vary much on the first few wether looking at Plat+, Masters+, or looking at the average across all ranks. > - 3. even then these are from the highest winrate games, aka. the stomp/very ahead games. So this is not the norm and not very usefull to evaluate the sup item change. Supports that are too weak should simply be adjusted individually, rather than making changes that affect the entire role like changing the support items again. > - 4. yes, the 2nd not delayed by much, but the 3rd and 4th are delayed by 2-3 mins WHEN THEY WERE AHEAD!!! aka got gold from assists, objectivs etc.!!! Tahm Kench's 2nd and 3rd items are delayed by 3-4 mins already! Third item is sooner. Keep in mind I am not counting the support items (old or new) or boots as items towards this count. So third is the last item before giving up a slot for {{item:2055}}. Bear in mind that the average time for Plat (which make up the vast majority of plat+, and those above plat are generally faster yet) games to end globally is [29-ish minutes](https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/game-durations). The timing of second item both now and previously is close to that mark, so the winner is usually decided by then. Even looking at all ranks which would bring the average game time up, for supports that are currently useful in the role there is usually a 55% to 60% chance they are on a team that will win if they finish two items not including boots or the support item. > He technically lost 3-4 mins worth of gold, even the high winrate champs got hit by this hard enough to notice! > And Janna still has 2 kills and 13 assists, but lost 2-3mins worth of gold. > - 5. and last, the negativ gold impact becomes the most notable once the supp item is completely upgraded, after earning 1000g gold, the old 500g upgrade was hit around min 12-14, double that to 24-28 mins and then the impact REALLY starts to affect the statistics. > But only 1/4 th of the games even went longer then 30 mins, so the the biggest impact, on the non-stomp games, will not be shown directely. Timing changes hold true when comparing support champions with similar item builds, at least when for those that do not super suck like {{champion:201}} and {{champion:350}} who were already in a bad spot from what the stats show. I did mess up when jotting down the change for third item though. It is up by 2 minutes for champions that used old spell thief's (who in more than 50% of games would never upgrade to tier 3 so they have more stats from that). It is down by 3 minutes for champions that build old targon's, as they would upgraded it before buying other items more than 50% of the time (meaning the time for them having support item plus upgraded boots plus 3 finished items). Which bring the champions that build the budget items intended for supports into having similar item timings (give or take a minute) for both tank supports and enchanters. This is a good thing as it is easier to compare the power levels of the two in terms of items. Quickly looking at other types like mages, {{champion:235}} , and {{champion:555}} ; the +2/-3 minutes for the third item seems to hold true based on likely hood of them previously not finishing the support item / completing it first. The time for first item completion (ignoring finishing old support items as first item) occurs 2 minutes sooner across the board.
Are we looking at the same statistics? (and yes I also dont count boots as a full item) Nautilus in patch 9.22 got his 2nd item (knights vow) at min 21, in patch 9.23 at 23min. His 3rd (zekes) at 27 min in patch 9.22 and in patch 9.23 at the 30 min mark. He got his 1 item 2 mins earlier in 9.23, but has worse stats overall, a weaker early (or the same early, but not a quicker 1st item, if he buys a dorans shield to compensate the loss of the relic passive) and less gold generation. So a weaker, but 2 min earlier, 1 item spike, at the cost of a decent earlygame, worse midgame (until he reaches the 3rd upgrade), but with worse overall gold gen, and a completely gutted "lategame" economy ("lategame" meaning after his 3rd upgrade, aprox 20-24min mark). Thats the supp item update in a nutshell. And this is not a good change. The idea of free upgrades is nice, but how they did it is pretty bad. As a sidenode: Pyke is a kill support, he will not be affected that much because his main gold income comes from the kills. Same with other poke/mage supports like brand, lux etc. They will be more like assassins, ether they can kill the target or they will be pretty useless because they lack gold later on.
: Those stats aren't nearly worth 1000 gold. Stop the drugabuse, please.
https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Remnant_of_the_Aspect Look at the cost analysis. 10%cdr = 266g 200%hpReg = 600g 50 hp = 133g Granted that the regen isnt always effective, but it helps alot in small skirmishes or in the laning phase, so its still pretty useful overall
: >Do you see why the +2g/10s is STILL a ridicouls joke compared to the passive? But that's not where the gold comes from. It comes from not needing to use gold to upgrade the gold item and the gold item having better stats than previously (so the value of the item goes up). Not only do you save gold, but you also get stats that are worth gold for free If you calculate the saved gold and the amount you get from the item, it exceeds (or is at least equal) the old gold items for the majority of the game. The game has to go to ultra late before it starts to hurt you.
...... Are you sure about your claim? Have you even read my post? The relic line lost: 10%cdr +200%hpReg+ 50HP = 1000g + the goldgen passive + the healing effect and gained: 40AP = 870g or 25AD = 875g Just from the raw stats we lost more, got worse stats, and lost our main income later and the ESSENTIAL healing effect early... Yes, you safe the first 450g but need to buy a dorans to have the same effect as before (which you desperatly needed as a tank supp), and you have worse gold gen than before. You will reach the final upgrade aprox around the 20-24min mark, (10-12min for the 500g treshhold) so you dont get these "free" stats before the end of the midgame anyway. Depending on the overall game the worse gold gen and still needing the missing stats( 10%cdr = 266g), you will only have a very small buff WHEN YOU HIT THE FINAL UPGRADE! **But the instant you get it, you lose a potential 31.5g/10s = 189g per minute!!!** So even if we grant a full 1000g bonus(which would be much lower because of the worse gold gen), this bonus is invalidated after just 6 mins and you lose a ridiculos amount of gold per miunte, as a Supporter how is statistically 3kg behind every other role at the end of a game. This is bullshit and certainly not "buff"!
Ventira (NA)
: I was literally quoting Riot in the patch notes, in regards to the gp/5 changes, I didn't crunch the math myself. Also it's 3g/10, not 2.
The problem is that Riot themself dont know what they are talking about, but luckely for us we can test if their statements hold any water or not. Math to the rescue^^ "Most of the gold these effects granted is still earned in the lower tiers and passive gold per 10 is up, so mid/late game economy is still buffed overall considering the gold made available by the free upgrades." The "lategame" part is just a flat out lie, as youve seen the increase of the g/10s is horseshit complared to the loss of the goldincome passive. And the gold we safe early needs to be invested into manareg/Ap or a dorans to compansate for the lost passive effects. So early is worse/same, mid is technically a buff **IF** you get the upgrade super early (you will get the free upgrade only around 20 mins or so), otherwise its the same or even a nerf because of the lower goldgeneration. These guys dont know how their own game works, dont want to understand how it works or actively want to destroy the game. Riot themself can pick their poision! Ether they are f****** incompetent or they actively want to harm the gamebalance to force certain (assassin and playmaking) playstyles. (which arnt influenced by these changes as much as lets say boring entchanters and tank supps ;D). They can choose whatevery they like best ^^ Yes, I know its 3g/10s in TOTAL, but the relic line had 1g/10s and the spellthief line had 2g/10s already. So the "buff" was a +2g/10s or a +1g/10s respectivly :D
: The stats say everything is fine. Supports appear to on average finish there first and third item 1 to 2 minutes earlier than on patch 9.22. They are finishing their boots upgrade and second item at about the same timing. Their fourth item is 1 to 2 minutes later. Fifth item is the support item, cause the stats site I am looking at does not pick it up as a completed item for the new support items (and I am not counting it when looking at the old patch stats). So on the fourth item the game has gone on so long supports no longer have a control ward slot. So much noise over unimportant numbers like gold per 10. It is when item spikes are occurring that is important, especially early items. I am looking and the 2.0 beta of [lolalytics.com](https://lolalytics.com/lol/tierlist/?lane=support) for global plat+. I am specifically looking at {{champion:111}} {{champion:40}} cause they are the current two highest on the tier list for that site. Complaints about the the anit-poaching being present on the tier 3 is valid though. By that point it really should be more about what is the correct play rather than worrying about abuse cases.
You dont seem to know who to interpret these statistics, but hey atleast tried to look up statistics! Thats a good start. Lets begin: - 1. you are looking at the highest winrate champs, and they win means they get assists means they get lots of gold which is not tide to the passive. - 2. There are not that many games currentely where they even get the 4th item. (its was every 4 th game, now its every only 6th game for janna or every 7th to 10th game for naut) - 3. even then these are from the highest winrate games, aka. the stomp/very ahead games. So this is not the norm and not very usefull to evaluate the sup item change. - 4. yes, the 2nd not delayed by much, but the 3rd and 4th are delayed by 2-3 mins WHEN THEY WERE AHEAD!!! aka got gold from assists, objectivs etc.!!! Tahm Kench's 2nd and 3rd items are delayed by 3-4 mins already! He technically lost 3-4 mins worth of gold, even the high winrate champs got hit by this hard enough to notice! And Janna still has 2 kills and 13 assists, but lost 2-3mins worth of gold. - 5. and last, the negativ gold impact becomes the most notable once the supp item is completely upgraded, after earning 1000g gold, the old 500g upgrade was hit around min 12-14, double that to 24-28 mins and then the impact REALLY starts to affect the statistics. But only 1/4 th of the games even went longer then 30 mins, so the the biggest impact, on the non-stomp games, will not be shown directely. But as you can see, these changes STILL affected even the highest winrate champs by a definitaly notable affect is a big red flag on how bad the change is for "normal" games. Just as a simple example: we got a +2g/10s on the relic line and a +1g/10s on the spellthief line, +2g/10s is a free pink ward every 6 mins. The relic line went from a max possible 33.5g/10s down to 3g/10s, and the spellthief line went from max 24g/10s down to 3g/10s. (And you could safe up the stacks too) Even at only 50% effectivness, the g/10s buff is outperformed by miles on the old items. The "safed gold" by not having upgrade cost, doesnt make up for this lategame economy cripple. (The gold gen is also much slower earlier and we lost the heal/dmg of the passives) (I have looked specifcally at the relic line a bit closer, if you want to see for yourself: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/general-discussion/KYT7n33y-lets-fix-the-new-support-items-for-riot-starting-with-the-new-relic-line)
: How do we get gold on t3 support items?
Its simple! You dont! :D +2g/10s is a pinkward every 6 minutes. And its only a +1g/10s for spellthief line. Enjoy! Thx Riot, you fucked up again. Like you always do.... {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
: > a 4 charge relic could give you 360 gold.... for just 1 fully stacked relic! Only if you use all of the stacks on cannons but everyone knows that didn't happen in actual games. Riot does have stats that they can use. People weren't using gold items optimally anyway. Let's use janna as an example. She used {{item:3312}} . However, she didn't go around using zephyr on enemies and basic attacks whenever she had stacks available. People simply didn't use the gold items as much in the late game as during laning. That's just a fact.
Yes, I completely agree that the gold items werent used to full efficency, but this was just an example on how much gold you could get out of only **1(!)** fully stacked relic... If we say you get 3 melees and the siege minion its 153g ( = 21g*3 + 90g). **From only 1 full stacked and not optimaly used relic, you need 13mins ingame time with the +2g/10s....** Do you see why the +2g/10s is STILL a ridicouls joke compared to the passive? And you get 4 charges every 80 seconds.... The {{item:3312}} had a 2g/10s on it, you we just got a +1g/10s = 6g/minute from the "buff"... And you got 66g from all 3 stacks. Thats 11 minutes worth of time if we get +1g/10s only.... And "That's just a fact."....... So I hope you can see now why this is a COMPLETE GUTTING of any non-assassin/non-killmage "supports" economy in the lategame (meaning after 25+mins...). And we are talking about a role, that has statistically 3000g less than any other role at the end of a game. Any questions or doubts left?
Ηuawei (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=GinoSoldier,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-11-20T22:30:38.383+0000) > > Except what kind of utility do support champions provide when lifesteal far outstrips our healing capabilities, almost everyone has the basic built-in utility to peel for themselves or catch someone out and not a single one of them provides decent vision from their kits? > > If "support" means to be a CC and Ward Bot for the players who get to live out their power fantasies at our expense, then support will simply go back to being the Autofill role everyone hates. > > I wish i could redesign every aupport in the game as well as the entire itemization system just to solve this issue for good. Do you remember Heart of Gold and Phisolopher stone meta? If you do, then you know what kind of game to expect playing support going forward with this season. If you don't know what im talking about do yourself a favour and read on it to educate yourself. You'll see what i mean.
> [{quoted}](name=Xalasmeni Banana,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2019-11-20T22:34:58.772+0000) > > Do you remember Heart of Gold and Phisolopher stone meta? > If you do, then you know what kind of game to expect playing support going forward with this season. > > If you don't know what im talking about do yourself a favour and read on it to educate yourself. > You'll see what i mean. heart of gold etc. was the only way for supports to get anykind of gold for sups back then, now we have (and now HAD in the "lategame") the gold income sup items :/
Ηuawei (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-11-20T14:58:56.472+0000) > Mage supports don't exist anymore. What mage supports? With the gold nerfs nobody will play mage supports because they won't be viable
> [{quoted}](name=Xalasmeni Banana,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-11-20T22:32:55.066+0000) > > Mage supports don't exist anymore. What mage supports? With the gold nerfs nobody will play mage supports because they won't be viable There are Entchanters/healers, who get assists, and "mage" aka kill supports like Brand/Lux who will get kills. They arnt impacted as much, rather its more of a risk/reward thing like assassins. Ether you kill or you become more or less "useless". Entchanters and Tanks got the big middle finger early and lategame.
: supports were becoming too powerful, they shouldnt be. they should be for their utility. you can still pick a damage support for a kill lane, where you need to kill instead of just harassing for gold and free damage. supports dont need the healing from relic should anymore because now they should be taking less damage overall, especially with the frost item not dealing a ton of poke damage anymore.
> [{quoted}](name=XJ99999999999999,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-11-20T22:01:18.494+0000) > > supports were becoming too powerful, they shouldnt be. they should be for their utility. you can still pick a damage support for a kill lane, where you need to kill instead of just harassing for gold and free damage. > > supports dont need the healing from relic should anymore because now they should be taking less damage overall, especially with the frost item not dealing a ton of poke damage anymore. Why do you think supports were too powerfull? I can understand that some supports are very powerful in there field, like Blitz, Pike, Senna, Brand etc. but for me those champions are to powerfull in general, not the support role. And the "healing" ( we are talking about 5-30 Hp, dependent on missing Hp) wasnt just to counter act support harresment, but also adc harassment.
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2019-11-20T18:30:17.930+0000) > > Yep, melees will have to rush a dorans shield or Knights Vow and Enchanters will have to buy 2-3 {{item:1004}} or a {{item:3114}} ontop to counter the mana issues early on :/ > I dont know why they thought, that the free upgrade would give too much power so that they had to axe the gold gen. > This is the support roll we are talking about here afterall.... Not to mention the indirect nerf to Athenes' AP passive via reduced mana regen stats.
> [{quoted}](name=GinoSoldier,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=000100010000,timestamp=2019-11-20T19:49:17.641+0000) > > Not to mention the indirect nerf to Athenes' AP passive via reduced mana regen stats. They have been on a war against manaregen since decades. I wouldnt say that lossing 10 Ap is that big of a deal compared to the loss of early manaregen, but it stil hurts overall.
: I was wondering this too, but neat to hear that it's roughly the same.
Ventira (NA)
: Cuz apparently the gp/10 for Tier 3 is roughly equal to the amount of gold generated from the old support items, in mid-game/later, when players usually completed the old t3's. (which makes sense, after a certain point in the game relic shield users were not getting execute gold anymore.) It's also worth remembering that supports do have a grand total of 1500 freed up gold too.
What in the world are you talking about? The upgrade to 3g /10s is not even close to the old rates at Tier3 items! Its not even in the same ballpark! Ontop overall gold gen being slower in general. (As a quick example you now get +12g/minute more now, but a 4 charge relic could give you 360 gold.... for just 1 fully stacked relic! And you will still get more charged off later! To get 360g from the "improved" gold/10s you need to wait 30mins....... Often games dont even last that long....) Heres some detailed math for the relic line, if you want to understand what these changes will bring: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/general-discussion/KYT7n33y-lets-fix-the-new-support-items-for-riot-starting-with-the-new-relic-line?comment=0001 Now your (less) efficent gold gen is capped at 1000g, you lost important stats that you need and have to buy now with your "freed up gold", and support were behind every other role by ~3000g overall, so even if the supps safed 1400g, why was it nessesacry to completely remove their lategame income!? They dont get kills, they dont get minions, they dont get solo assists or solo objectivs and +2g/10s is a free pink ward every ~6 minutes.... The idea of free upgrades is good, but how they did it is a catastrophy.
Noraver (NA)
: The Shield line needs Health Regen. It's as simple as that. Halving it for Ranged is the way to go. I immediately thought we'd need to buy Doran's Shield as well after seeing the patch notes, and I feel it may be the best way to go. Unless you genuinely want all melee Supports to rush Knight's Vow, in which case... Thanks, I guess, Rito? Pretty boring item builds. The gold generation being removed at Tier 3 is one of the worst ideas, genuinely. What, so, I get some bonus stats for hitting Tier 3 before my opponent, but now they get to catch up to me because you've all of a sudden removed my income. Great, thanks, I hate it! You're going to see a lot of Supports rushing Knight's Vow (Or another Health Regen item) and Athene's Unholy Grail/Tear, simply because they straight removed mana regen/health regen. The mana regen I don't care as much about, because Supports were slowly being phased out with Mages, but the health regen... That just hurts.
> [{quoted}](name=Noraver,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KYT7n33y,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-11-20T17:21:54.736+0000) > > The Shield line needs Health Regen. It's as simple as that. Halving it for Ranged is the way to go. > I immediately thought we'd need to buy Doran's Shield as well after seeing the patch notes, and I feel it may be the best way to go. Unless you genuinely want all melee Supports to rush Knight's Vow, in which case... Thanks, I guess, Rito? Pretty boring item builds. > > The gold generation being removed at Tier 3 is one of the worst ideas, genuinely. > What, so, I get some bonus stats for hitting Tier 3 before my opponent, but now they get to catch up to me because you've all of a sudden removed my income. > Great, thanks, I hate it! > > You're going to see a lot of Supports rushing Knight's Vow (Or another Health Regen item) and Athene's Unholy Grail/Tear, simply because they straight removed mana regen/health regen. > The mana regen I don't care as much about, because Supports were slowly being phased out with Mages, but the health regen... That just hurts. Yep, melees will have to rush a dorans shield or Knights Vow and Enchanters will have to buy 2-3 {{item:1004}} or a {{item:3114}} ontop to counter the mana issues early on :/ I dont know why they thought, that the free upgrade would give too much power so that they had to axe the gold gen. This is the support roll we are talking about here afterall....
: Where's my support item as a melee tank support?
Your right, Riot once again proved themself to be incapable thinking ahead and what their changes will do to the game..... Ive started a discussion over in the General Discussion channel for the relic line, or heres the link: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/general-discussion/KYT7n33y-lets-fix-the-new-support-items-for-riot-starting-with-the-new-relic-line, where Ive looked a bit deeper into the math and explained why Riot screwed up and how to fix this mess potentionaly. Drop by and join in on the discussion if youd like :D Why do we always have to fix their mistakes.....
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=Frontline Fury,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TqfEB5hI,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-11-20T00:09:21.246+0000) > > I see the new support item changes, and can only think... > > What {{champion:44}} am {{champion:201}} i {{champion:12}} supposed {{champion:53}} to {{champion:89}} build {{champion:111}} with {{champion:98}} my {{champion:14}} severe {{champion:106}} poke {{champion:31}} susceptibility {{champion:54}} and {{champion:3}} low {{champion:79}} regen? > > Thanks for just utterly gutting any and all melee champions in bot lane. We get it, you only want to see high burst pure damage casters. We get it already. It's forbidden to play champions without extremely low mana costs and either high range or high {{champion:555}} sustain. So where are we supposed to play all the melee tanks that each have abilities that cost 80+ mana at level 1? That's 40% of our max mana pool. With lower mana regen than any other champion class in the game. And now we've lost our health sustain as well. > > Am i supposed to bring {{champion:44}} into top lane with his extremely low base health, gutted base armor and ridiculous mana costs? Am i supposed to start playing {{champion:111}} in mid lane just because the pros pulled it off once or twice? > > Are you going to pretend {{champion:12}} has been a viable jungler for the past ~~three~~ four years? > > No compensation buffs whatsoever? Nothing? You just completely forgot these champions existed because you were so obsessed about all the fancy burst mages and assassins in bot lane and their upcoming pop star + prestige skins? > > Just another slap in the face to tank players. I get that we're supposed to soak damage but i wish it didn't have to be psychological as well. Believe it or not, we actually do like being able to play the game. We don't just want to get hit by every new wide-hitbox skillshot on the new super-kiter CC-bot ranged champion/caster of the month. Did you even read the patchnotes? Meele Tanks still use Relic Shielt, the Health/AP or Health/AD item which can execute a minion for gold. Do you seriously want to tell me you played Leona, Allistar or Blitzcrank with a Coin? na.. Meele champs use Relic Shielt AP or AD version Range Champs use Spellthievs dagger AP or AD version
You completely missed the point... The heal of relic procs and the base regen have been removed. Go and have fun vs adc and poke champions! Need to invest this new gold that we ""safed"" into a dorans shield rush to not be completely useless/poked down. Remember, the supp items are only 50% gold efficent at the start! And the old one had atleast the heal proc for melees!
: Marksman changes coming to PBE in the next couple days
Hey Axes, this is more of a technical question: What kind of critical hit chance system does League use? - Just a normal random number gen or, - gauss/laplace random, - A PDR (pseudo random distribution), aka. "stacking" critchance, - a PID calculation, - some other version? I'm especially interested in this, to reduce the "dangerzone" of the RNG of crit chance (from 20%-50%) to a minium without sacreficing the "random" aspect. ______ Regarding the item changes: Introducing even more true dmg is pretty dangerous because there is not much of a counter except stacking HP, which lowers the varity of tanks even more. And Adcs normally are already so good vs tanks that they dont even build their AntiTank item and now your making it better vs squishys too. The idea to make them less bursty vs squishys is a good idea, but this changes the overall balance, so its not easy to predict what will happen. Lower early/fleet sustain is a good change! I'm looking forward to the changes to crunch a bunch of numbers and scenarios and come back to you if things go downhill :P
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: April 25
Regarding Syndra: Why not introduce a special mechanic for her R, that if she missed all of her abilities, her R deals reduced dmg. Concrete: "-30% dmg, if the target hasnt been hit by her Q or W+Q or E+Q (by a Q-based ability) in the last 4 seconds" Why I am suggesting this? Because it feels extremely shitty, if you sucsessfully outplayed her and dogded everything thrown at you (which is not that easy with most champs), and still get 1-shotted because she pressed R. For a high skillcap Champion like Syndra, this doesnt feel right, hence my suggestion. You should be punished for missplays/geting outplayed. A Lux can do 0 Dmg if she misses everything, but a Syndra always does dmg (and its still pretty decent dmg, even factoring in my -30% suggestion) Ontop this suggestion also only touches the absolut worst case possible, and leaves the rest (~95+%) of all the cases untouched. So there should be no to minimal impact in general, but giving a reward for actually managing to dogde everything.
Meddler (NA)
: Yeah, Crit does run on a pseudo random system. Your chance to crit initially is equal to the displayed value. The more the amount you crit diverges from the expected value though the more your future crit chance will get adjusted until it gets back close to expected values. If you've got a Zeal, and have got a string of crits in a row for example your chance of critting will be somewhat below 20% as a result. Or if you've got an IE and a PD and had a whole run of non crits your crit chance will be higher than 50% and continue to rise if you keep not critting. Having said that, it's not a dramatic change over a small number of attacks. Two non crits when at 50% chance to crit won't give you a massively increased chance on your third shot. It's more a system intended to counteract more extreme streaks over a larger number of hits.
Oh wow, thats a rather different system than I expected! I know about PRD that lowers your intial crit chance ( 50% -> only 25% on your first aa) but then it ramps up, so you get more and more crit chance until you crit and it goes back to the inital lowered critchance. (25% on first aa -> no crit, 50% on your 2nd aa -> no crit, 75% on your 3rd aa etc.) In this version there is no "lowering" after a crit row, because its already at a lower inital chance. I know is rather bad to give all the data at hand, since "holes"/exploids could be found, but could you give me an example by how much it would increase/decrease at 50%? potentionally per crit/non-Crit aa? That would be really awesome :D
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: February 28
A very technical question regarding Marksmen and their Crit-builds: Did you guys modifiy the C value of the PRD algorythem? Especially, if you introduced a mechanic to lower the inital crit value after crits in a row? I would love to know that, if possible. It is sadly basically impossible to test for those things by myself, I tried it :/ This serves the purpose to create a fairer crit system/rng, while it still beeing random! Thanks in advice :D
: Congratulations on such an amazing post! Here are my thoughts on its components: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > As you already mentioned, the game is already pretty complex. The "boringness" of AAs can mostly get removed by abilities, mechanics and the overall kit/theme of a champion. I very very much agree that crit could potentially be removed from the game, and isn't as essential as many think. Sure, removing crit would require a rebalancing to many marksmen and some melee carries, but stats like attack speed and attack damage have much more room to be increased here. Even if those aren't what get targeted, champion kits are the perfect spot to add in more power, especially more conditional power unique to each champion. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > Like stated before: crit chance is **not** pure random, this is very important! > It uses PRD (pseudo random distribution), which is a very big improvement in terms of "fairness". To sum it up it looks at your previous attacks and modifies your critchance, instead of beeing completely independent, to get an overall more equal and less spikey outcome. This too I think is critically important (/pun). As unfair as crit can _feel_, its actual power is regulated to limit the impact of extreme luck, so at the end of the day it's basically a less clear/consistent way of adding burst onto every few attacks. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > Crit chance does not only lower the "boringness"/"predictableness" of AAs by a bit, its made in a way that gives very rewarding visual feedback! This is true, though I think this is also somewhat dampened by the fact that crit usually gets stacked to very high amounts, normally 80%. It definitely feels like an awesome burst of damage when it happens less than half the time (when it's at its most unstable), but past a certain point crits just end up being "normal" damage per attack for marksmen, causing crits to either become unimpressive, or become so overly prevalent that crit users end up outputting burst per second. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > If you invest in crit chance, the first amount (<=30) is roughly wasted combat stats. Why? Because its still to unreliable! > You cannot count on getting the amount of crits you "should" get, in short trades. If you always bet on your luck, it will backfire someday. This too I agree with, and while I think that is somewhat intentional (Riot doesn't want fighters as a whole class to build crit for some reason), I agree that the current way crit is implemented means there's always this intermediary period where critical strike is really unstable, even with a PRNG controlling its outliers. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > In the early laningphase 1 or 2 crits dont decide the hole game or the hole laningphase. The problem is if there are 2-3 lucky crits **in one trade!** I actually feel that even one crit in the laning phase really can determine its outcome in certain circumstances. This is why players used to run 1% crit in their old rune setups on the off-chance that they chunked their opponent in a trade. After the first few levels, it's not as bad, but it can really mess people up in the very first few minutes. I do, however, agree that a streak of luck on either side due to crit is guaranteed to frustrate at least one person, which is why random crit distibution needs to obey strict rules if it wants to appear fair at all times. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > A lot of people suggest to change crit chance into a flat modifier, or something like "every x AA deals more dmg/bonus effect/becomes a crit" etc., or working like fevor, or something along those lines. > _The big problem, a very big problem with all of them, is **abusability!**_ I too think that many proposed systems, including that energized crit system, do have a problem of abusability, though I don't think the ability to _maximize_ the potential of a mechanic is necessarily abusive. If I may shamelessly plug my own suggestion here, I proposed [an alternative crit model](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/voeyqoFA-a-deeper-dive-into-critical-hits-inputdiscussionalternatives-appreciated?comment=0010) that would basically function like the three-hit passives we see on champions like Vayne or Vi: for sure, the mechanic can be optimized through certain types of play, and would likely require caution/rebalancing towards champions who'd be especially good at applying it, but because the means of applying crits would be innately more interactive (the opponent could play around this model as well), I don't think it could really be qualified as abuse. > [{quoted}](name=Lord Desert,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=voeyqoFA,comment-id=000e00000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-02-21T03:58:13.836+0000) > > If you have 50% crit chance, you actually only have a 25% chance to crit on your first AA! > > If this AA **DIDNT** crit,_ your next AA gets an additional +25% on top!_ > So your 2nd AA has a 50% chance to crit. > If your AA still did not crit, it gets another +25%, so it has a 75% chance to crit in total. > If it still did not crit, it gets +25% again, so we arrive at 100%, which means this AA will guaranteed crit! > > After a crit you will reset back to the initial 25% crit chance. > > In short: We introduce caps to eliminate those outliers that can break "fairness" in shorter periods. We still wand to be random and also dont want to interfere with the normal PRD, we are only touching the troublesome outliers! > These caps force us to have NonCritical AAs or guaranteed Crits based on the actual crit chance. > Remember the amount of crits **IN A SHORT PERIOD** was the big problem we identified. Thats what those caps to fix. I commented a little on this on another reply, but to reiterate, I really like this system. Introducing hard caps to the current pseudorandom number generator, in a manner that wouldn't lend themselves to predictability, would allow the current crit model to feel more consistently fair, without requiring a total overhaul. While I still wouldn't really be a fan of the remaining randomness (the order in which you crit can be important in some fights), I still think this would be a tremendous step forward in establishing a crit system that is less harmful to the integrity of what is meant to be a competitive, skill-based game. Kudos again on the massive and well-written post!
> Kudos again on the massive and well-written post! I very much appreciate it! At first it was just 1 massiv text without much that structure and when I looked at it again, even I wouldnt want to read till the end xD So I had to do some big restructuring, hopefully it was bearable :D ____ > Sure, removing crit would require a rebalancing to many marksmen and some melee carries ... Yes, it definitely would! Which is why riot wouldnt do it in the first place. The amount of work put into it wouldnt be justified by the outcome :/ But some "small" fixes should definitely be fine. Maybe when they look at adcs in general again, then there might be a chance to make some bigger changes, if they would want to do some. ___ >I think this is also somewhat dampened by the fact that crit usually gets stacked to very high amounts, normally 80%. At this point, aka the late game, it IS wanted that crits arent "luck based" anymore! At that point it servers as a flat dmg modifier like most suggestions suggest. You dont want to have luck involed if every AA, every Crit can decide the game ;D Crit chances "anti-boringness" phase is especially designed for the mid game. Where most people have everything availabe, but adcs still lack ether the AS or the dmg to create "interesting" situations. They can use show off all their tools, but the outcome is pretty low at that point. (Remember when it was tank meta where adcs were oblivous because they werent even close to fight tank in the midgame on equal grounds? Thats when botrk and the crit items where buffed!) Crit is mainly there to make this (adc-)midgame "interesting" and later serve as a flat dmg modifier. ___ I havnt seen your suggestion but I surely will check it out! To adress the "abuse"/maximize part: If a champion is balanced around that, that is complettely fine. But it has severe results for the champion, if "normal" people cant reliabley use it, only skilled players. This will create problems like Ryze and Azir! Bad in normal skill range and good in high skill range, or worst in normal and balanced in high. Its easier to remove "abuse" chases than to balance everything around them. So if the champ is balanced around this, its fine, but if this abuse is not the adressed by the overall balance, things can and will get bad! Really bad! ___ For my suggestion: It doenst work wonders, its only designed to remove the worst cases, you still can get pretty unlucky! So it makes things better, but is still 100% (pseudo-) random, just so you dont get your hopes up to high :P And like I said most would never even notice a change. You can still boost your chances but not even close to beeing "abusable". Its pretty nice to actually have a discussion once in a while here on boards xD They are (sadly) pretty rare :/
Craktite (EUW)
: Ok, Lissandra really needs a buff.
Shouldnt the new {{item:3003}} be pretty decent on her? First mana recoverey on lvl up, then reduced mana cost + mana stack and 20 cdr. Shouldnt help this liss a decent bit?
: Kai'Sa makes the Void seem boring
When I first heard about another void champion and her beeing a female, I instantely thought about her: https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blizzplanet.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsupreme-starcraft-ii-heart-of-the-swarm-single-player-1.jpg&sp=3aa2be90d861e63a3d8a9b7b69636641 So much potential wasted :/
Novalas (NA)
: Patch Chat with the Playtest Team - 8.4
Hey there, its a big patch so things will always be a bit difficult :D Personally I'm a bit concerned that squishys, especially adcs, might like bone plating a bit to much (150 potential less burst at lvl 18 is alot), maybe some bonus health scaling could help with that. For Ap itemaztion, {{item:3151}} max hp is problematic, on spammers as well as long dots. Im sure you have seen vandrils morde video :D I know it got nerfed after that, but it still does alot of dmg :S Lastly, a more personal thing, I think Chogaths small VGU feels off. Before his Q and E spikes were physical spikes, which made total sense. Now they are these magical glowing spikes, which is basically "magic" and not physical! (also the Q "spikes" bend a bit to much, they look like more like zyra thorns than his spikes.) And all this feels pretty off to me. Its good that he gets some attention but I dont think these changes hit the mark. What do you think about them? (As a sidenode: His range indicators for his Q and W are off by quite a bit, but thats from the devs not you guys :D)
: Champ Mastery Costs, Masterwork Chests, and Some Loot Buffs
Do you know the situation that if you did well with a champion, which you do not own, aka from the free champ rotation, and you get an S, you will not get a chest. This ok, but it feels not that good, especially if you dont get S marks that often! I propose that you can get champion cost reductions if you get a S/S+ mark! These reduction could be temporary or permant and they dont stack. So if I dont own Ahri and I get to play her when she is in the free rotation, get an S, I will get an 10% BE reduction for her! An S+ might even be 15% (or could also be only 10%). This is mostly aimed at new players who dont have that many champs, and also to reduce the bad feeling of getting basically nothing from good marks on unowned champs. (You dont get mastery points nor the chest). Its just a small thing, but what do you think? Also temporary(1week/month) or permanent? I personally am fine with a 1 month price reduction.
: Beefy topic - but in short. No we did not make changes to top lane because Hashinshin told us to kill ourselves - that's just par for the course being on the Live Gameplay team. Like many players, he has arguments that I/others agree are issues, but just as many other thoughts that I/others don't agree with. We've been talking about the state of top lane for awhile, but as I mentioned in my post on the dev corner sometimes these problems can take longer to solve, because sometimes we need to validate that there is actually a problem. Our runes team has been working on a fighter/bruiser focused keystone since runes launched. It's one of the holes that we acknowledged existed and would need a solution in due course when the system went live. It may have taken longer than we'd like, but it's also relative to the urgency of the problem. Bruisers have been functional in the current meta using a variety of the keystones. The problem right now is that bruiser players don't feel like there is a keystone that's catered to their specific playstyle. Definitely still a problem, but one among a cornucopia that we want to get around to. In regards to top having it's own specific section in the patch notes. That's something that we'd talked about trying to do more of going into this year, "that" being grouping changes up if there was a common trend we could call out. We experimented with it a bit on our 7.24b patch, and liked some of the impact there so wanted to look for opportunities to do it again. That being said, our patch note bros are the ones that decide the overall format of the patch notes, not the Live Gameplay team. They're responsible for taking the output of the work of a patch, and bundling it in a way that they think communicates our goals in the best possible way for players who read them. To phrase this a different way, we didn't go into the patch being "this is the Hashinshin top lane patch", rather we had a designer who'd joined us from another team earlier in January that had been putting thought into top and what you see in the patch is some of the initial outputs of his investigations with more to come in future patches. Gustaf and Aether saw the opportunity to group up that work, so they did. In regards to the sentiment of needing to wish bodily harm on us in order to get us to act, I think a perfect example from this very patch that demonstrates the opposite is the AP itemization rework that we've been working on on Live Gameplay since October. We'd been seeing a lot of dissatisfaction from mage players regarding how stale their itemization felt, and decided to take the project on as something of high value to both open up build diversity, and allow players to feel like they could make more meaningful and interesting decisions in the item system. There was no one wishing us bodily harm because they had to build Morello first every game, nor did we engage with players on the topic before we started the project, but it was something we saw a lot of players talking about so we took action. Maybe in another region there's been a vocal player telling us that AP itemization has been ruining this game for months, and to them they might feel like this patch was driven partly by their sentiment, and you know what, good on them. We have the good fortune of being a game with very passionate players, and if people feel vindicated when something that they feel strongly about in League changes, I'm fine with that. At the end of the day League will likely never be the perfect game for the majority of our players, and as a result people will always complain about the thing that feels most pressing to them. Given that we patch every two weeks, the likelihood of us shipping changes to something that is being talked about by the community is inevitable. TL;DR - When you cut through the weeds Hashinshin has some valid points that we agree with, many that we don't, but we do not change our priorities for League based on what he says (The Jax bugfix being the exception, a designer saw the video, figured he knew the cause and fixed it because that's a shitty thing for any Jax player).
Thanks for your time to clear this up a bit Maple! Good to hear this from a Rioter himself, so we dont need to assume it anymore. Just as a small nudge, to counter this "we must complain to make riot hear us" - mentality, if possible react to some ideas or suggestions that arent based on salty raginess. This mentality is mostly fueled if the community gets "no" reaction from "normal" things. So you can put the wind out off the sails of the mentality ;P (You dont need to overdo it and comment on everything, that is completely unreasonable, but if you see a good idea/discussion, maybe drop your personal stance (definitely say its YOUR OWN stance, just to be on the safe side). A "hmm I like this idea, could fiddle around with it to test if it fits" is already enough! No promises,that it will be implemented, or be the next big feature. Not needed) (Also you will bring attention to such ideas/discussions to get them bigger and likely better in the end :P) (And this is also needed on the current boards, that good discussions/features/ideas are highligthed a bit) (Just a small nudge for a possible idea in the future ;D)
: > First, DeathBurs7 you are saying that CaptainMarvelos brings attention to this problem, or even "creates" this problem by bring up/"confirming" a connection to Hashinshins rant and Riot's actions, especially as a mod. Thats the general gist I'm getting from your words. Yeah, that's a pretty good summary. I wouldn't go as far as to say "create", but definitely "confirm/amplify", yes. > CaptainMarvelous, on the otherhand, wants to bring attention to this, but as a warning for Riot I get the intent. More than that, I agree with the intent. I'm just thinking that in practice, making this thread goes against this stated intent. > The core of the problem at hand is [...] that the **general preception** of Riot tweaking/reacting only to the loudest, rudest complaints. Precisely. The issue at hand here is an issue of perception, not of actual facts. And how do we act on community perceptions? By having influencers (Moderators included) push the other side of the story. NOT by having influencers present the perception as a fact while trying to "warn against it". > I honestly feel like I just should rant over something and not even try to solve it. I understand the feeling. As Sparkle would say, feelings are always valid. The problem is if you act on it and actually make those rants, believing they have more impact. As for me, I don't think they do, but even I can get discouraged some times when a post I put a lot of efforts into die in Gameplay without stirring any good discussion. Even thinking that rants have no impact, or at least less impact than a polite post, I get tempted to make them, just to vent because I'm angry. So I definitely understand where you come from. But that's beside the point here. > In my opinion, Riot needs to be very carefull not to encourge this "rant and only than things will get done" behavior, supporting this actively OR passively! And so what should they have done? I mean, really, it's a lose-lose situation. They shouldn't have made the change to Top lane, just to make sure the community doesn't believe it's because of Hashinshin? That doesn't work. Hashinshin would just have continued his perpetual ranting, and Riot has to make the changes at some point. And whatever point in time they finally do the changes, Hashinshin can claim it's because of him. Riot had no solution except ignoring him and proceeding as they intended. > So this post here is definitely not a problem, the cause or an amplifier of this, it warns Riot about what has happend and that they should avoid it! The problem or a cause, no I agree. But an amplifier? Definitely yes! Look at yourself, you're saying "what happened", you're presenting it as fact. Even though you said yourself it was a problem of perception, even though you're aware of it, you're reinforcing that perception right now. And Capt'n OP did the same. They didn't cause the problem, but they ARE amplifying it. Conclusion is, we're all on the same side here, we all want the same goal. We're just disagreeing on the best way to reach this common goal. All I'm saying is, if you don't want Riot to react to future rants, don't make them look like they did this time.
Dont worry, I always assumed we were on the same page, just the "how good" this was dealt with, is where we diver. Futhermore I can even understand where youre coming from! And I'm also not planning to change over to this "rant" style :D > The issue at hand here is an issue of perception, not of actual facts. And how do we act on community perceptions? By having influencers (Moderators included) push the other side of the story. NOT by having influencers present the perception as a fact while trying to "warn against it". The problem is that we dont know what the actual truth is. Potentionally Hashinshins rage was really the main reason why things got done, beeing someone who got alot of attention, its as understandably possible as him having absolutly nothing to do with it at all. We dont know. The facts are: Toplane was a problem since long, Shin's complains/rants got super popular, and now things got (finally) adressed a bit. So even the mods surely dont know the actual truth, so their opinion is just that, an opinion. They cant "defend" it against something. Only voice concerns, and thats what Marvelous did, in my eyes. He didnt said that Riot tweaked things just because Shin ranted, he said that people would assume they tweaked it because of his rant. And thats the truth. Or it could be that I read that from between the linies, since I do that a lot and others might not have done that. Thats something I dont know. It could be that people, from beeing presented a situation that warns that things could happen in a certain way, that some people assume it actually happend this certain way, is possible! (What a monster of a sentence xD) But this is deeper psychologie. And while it is possible, normally people are smart enough to understand that its just a "warning" that things could be missunderstood in a certain way. So the "warning" initself is not a bad choice, rather the opposite, its there to deescalate things. ____ >And so what should they have done? I mean, really, it's a lose-lose situation. They shouldn't have made the change to Top lane, just to make sure the community doesn't believe it's because of Hashinshin? Yes, they were basically in a lose-lose situation by that time. But they could have avoided it, or atleast not let it escalate in this way. By adressing things earlier, stating something like "no connection"(which would not be completely believed, but its an indication which goes in exactly the right way to resolve/dampen the escalation!!!), or acknowlegding other/"normal" suggestions not just the ranty ones, which they never did. Those things would have helped. Right now they cant do much, especially if he actually did have an impact, which I believe he did in some way, shape or form. But hes definitely not the main reason, at best a catalisator which helps to get things rolling. (Beeing the worst typ of catalisator, they actually should not admit that his doing was some/a decent part for their action. Otherwise this would fuel bad things, as a sidenote). ____ >The problem or a cause, no I agree. But an amplifier? Definitely yes! Thats a bit of a wordplay, this post brings attention to this, it adresses the problem that people think that shin was/could be the main reason for the change, thus we should rant if we want to get heard by riot. He would have amplifed it, in my book, if he said "riot did this because of shin" and not "**people may think**, that riot did this because of shin". Technically yes, "amplified" could be used since it brought more attention to this, but I meant the bad "amplified" which actively supports this "rant => riot action" view :D ___ > Look at yourself, you're saying "what happened", you're presenting it as fact. The "what happend" meant: _"**people think** riot did this because of shin"_, not the _"riot did it because of shin"_ part. And this _"people think riot did this because of shin"_ is a safe call! I myself and Marvelous believe that shin very likely had some impact on riots decision, but is definitely not the main/only cause. While **other people** might think that shins rant is the only reason for the change. And thus getting the _"we should rant to get heard"_ logic, which is bad. So I do think that this thread wasnt a bad idea in general. Do you have an idea how he, a mod, could have done it "better" in your eyes?
: > It paints a picture that this loud outcry was what lead to such a situation... The picture doesn't paint itself. And if you'll allow me to thread the metaphor, you're one of the most prominent and most active artists right now. > First and foremost no, I don't want more Hashinshin-style "FIRE THE BALANCE TEAM" ranting. That is why I made this in the first place. I understand that, no worry, it was very clear from your very first post, but that's precisely my point. In my humble opinion, by making this thread, you won't prevent it from happening, you're just convincing the community that it worked this time. You're actively fighting against your own stated goal. You say you fear he will be seen as a point of contention, but you actively work to create this picture. I've got my own opinions and I'm an informed player myself, but what about that "Jhonny Noob" you mention, what will HE think when he sees a Mod explicitly saying that yes, Hashinshin did have an impact on Riot decision making? ('cause you're more careful in that last comment, but in the OP you DO say explicitly and very categorically that yes, he had an impact) The take-away "Jhonny Noob" will keep in mind isn't "Mod thinks ranting is bad", it's "Mod says ranting worked". And that's also why I keep mentioning your Mod status. As you said, "regardless of how much impact I think he had", the community doesn't really care. But as a Mod, the community does care about what you think and say. If you say he had an impact, you make it true. Mods are players too with their own opinions, but they aren't *just* players. They have more weight and influence, and they should be careful about it. Because of the "Jhonny Noobs". *~insert overused Spiderman quote~*
I would like to butt into this conversation :D First, DeathBurs7 you are saying that CaptainMarvelos brings attention to this problem, or even "creates" this problem by bring up/"confirming" a connection to Hashinshins rant and Riot's actions, especially as a mod. Thats the general gist I'm getting from your words. CaptainMarvelous, on the otherhand, wants to bring attention to this, but as a warning for Riot not to strengthen a policy of "only the loudest complaint will be heared" and thus increased hostility against riot. This includes some correlation between Hashinshins louder/more popular complains and even threats. I, personally, am on Marvelous side, bringing attention to this problem to **_adress_** this problem is absolutly fine. And his "attention-bringing" especially as a mod wasnt the creation of this problem, the problem is far deeper and even the hashinshin stuff is bascially only the top of the iceberg, in my book, but thats another story. The core of the problem at hand is not **IF** Riot did or did not tweak things because of Hashinshins agressive rants, its that the general preception of Riot tweaking/reacting only to the loudest, rudest complaints. Even if Riot 100%ly did not tweak things reactivly to his rants, everyone makes a correlation between a loud rant and (finally) now adressed problem. The "IF" doesnt matter! I also disagree about the "no impact" part, Rioter WILL have heard/seen them and they likely did have an impact! I doubt that it was the main reason for the changes, but it will certainly have had some impact on them. (Which is understandable, they are humans too, recieving literal "deaththreats" is not that easly swepped away from the skin/ brust off) As someone who claims to be a theorycrafter, someone who did alot of research and suggested alot of improvements (even if most of them were pretty small), which beeing so fleshed out that they could be introduced into the game as they are; Even someone like me felt the: _"Why do I even try to stay reasonable and explain my reasoning indepth, if I would just swear and complain in the rudest matter and just add a "do this instead" nothing more?_" On boards the frontpage is dominated by ragey, salty complains, **which dont even TRY to solve the problem they complain ab out!** But atleast they will recieve attention, directely or indirectely from Rioters. (They will know about it even if they dont comment on them) On the otherhand, how many good sugestions never even recieved a tiny bit of attention, heck even less, reactions from someone! I honestly feel like I just should rant over something and not even try to solve it. And THIS is why Riot should try to avoid at all cost! They dont need to implement ever suggestion or something stupid like that, just something as small as a "hey I like your idea, we might fiddle around with it and see if it could work out" is all that is needed! But this didnt even happen once in all this time..... To end this, let me bring it together: In my opinion, Riot needs to be very carefull not to encourge this "rant and only than things will get done" behavior, supporting this actively OR passively! This post from marvelous, imo, does essentially the same thing. We can arguee about the "activ" part shins rant did, but it did bring more attention to a problem, be it in a very bad way. And there was a result, a reaction. So this post here is definitely not a problem, the cause or an amplifier of this, it warns Riot about what has happend and that they should avoid it! Regardless of their actual "intentions" of their reactions.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: February 21
Hey Meddler, my question is a bit off-topic, sr about that! Its a very, very technical question and I dont know who might be able to answer this, or whom I should ask about this :/ It would be awesome if you could help me with this one! My questions is: Did you guys modifiy the PRD(pseudo random distribution) of crit chance in League? And are you use the standart values for C? I'm trying to do some improvements for crit chance to make it a bit more fair, without removing the "random" part! I did a lot of testing already, but these infos are not possible to obtain by normal testing... So who might be able to help me with this one? Thanks in advice! - LordDesert
: Should we see DoT champs become problematic, we'll likely be addressing Liandry's first.
Hey PHROXZoN, I'm sorry to get a bit off topic but I dont know who I can ask about this :/ I'm looking for very very technical infos about crit chance in League. I know about the PRD system and all the general stuff assoiciated with it, but I want to know if you guys made some modifications to it? Regarding lowering the inital crit chance after a crit below the c value for example. Who could/ should I ask this? Who might be able to help me with this? I honestly have no idea... I tried to figure it out myself but this kind of data is no something you can test for by normal means. I also didnt find anything in all the patchnotes or other sources... Thanks in advise! Have a great day/night, its 5 am here in EU :D
jadelink (OCE)
: Interesting to know. Yes, the old animation cancel, so he could 'store' a guaranteed crit was annoying, glad that ones truly gone.
Normally the only way to "abuse" the PRD system is if you would have like 20-40% crit chance while still beeing in the laning phase. There you could try to "stack" your critchance on minions a bit and then have a bit better odds vs the enemy champ. But the "abusability" is pretty low, only yasou and tryn should be able to pull it off and even than the "advantage" is not that big! Its miles away from "guaranteed" crits or so :D
: ______ Sooo, I'm finally done with this monster! I hope you enjoyed my old post :D First off, I will put most of the math at the end of this so it doesnt interfere that much and I can keep it a lot shorter that way :D And this comment is writen in a more general style, so guys who want to join our discussion have it easier to catch up. But its still an answer to your comment :P Let's get started! ____ ____ #The Good, the Bad, and the Crit Chance... - **1. Can Crit chance be removed?** - **2. Crit Chance not as bad as it seems?** - **3. The critchance problem** - **4. The problem with most suggestions/ crit alternatives** - **5. Math, Math, Math** - **6. Super short PRD TL;DR:** - **7. My suggestion, a stricter PRD** ___ **1. Can Crit chance be removed?** From a technical standpoint: Yes, definitely! It _is_ possible to remove it. But it might not be that easy! As you already mentioned, the game is already pretty complex. The "boringness" of AAs can mostly get removed by abilities, mechanics and the overall kit/theme of a champion. The removal of (controlled) randomness is also pretty good from a competativ standpoint, as it makes things absolutly fair. So, given a good alternative, crit chance can be removed! Before I go to the suggestions to replace critchance, I will quickly sum up some positves and its problem, for completions sake. ____ **2. Crit Chance not as bad as it seems?** Like stated before: crit chance is **not** pure random, this is very important! It uses PRD (pseudo random distribution), which is a very big improvement in terms of "fairness". To sum it up it looks at your previous attacks and modifies your critchance, instead of beeing completely independent, to get an overall more equal and less spikey outcome. I will explain it later with "some" (a ton of) math later. So to make it clear: Its not completely random, it already eliminats a big amount of bad cases, bad outliers. Crit chance does not only lower the "boringness"/"predictableness" of AAs by a bit, its made in a way that gives very rewarding visual feedback! The big number with the crit symbol, the chunk of the enemy healthbar and a crit animation/projectial, they all _feel_ exciting and rewarding. Not that "rewarding" for the recieving end but it will still get some excitment, a "holy shit, that dmg!", out of you :D > (Low) Crit chance is a double-edged sword, for you and your enemy! Let's look a bit deeper: crit chance, while beeing random, is still "fair" overall. It can bite you, but it can also bite your enemy! If you invest in crit chance, the first amount (<=30) is roughly wasted combat stats. Why? Because its still to unreliable! You cannot count on getting the amount of crits you "should" get, in short trades. If you always bet on your luck, it will backfire someday. So on the baseline you "waste" gold at the beginning, the risk is high. Obviously you can get lucky, but by the end of this comment you will look at low critchance and critstreaks with completely different eyes! To summarize it, if you invest gold into crit chance you have the right to get power for your money, but with low crit chance its more a risk than anything. You cant make reliable decisions on low critchance. ____ **3. The critchance problem** We now know that low critchance is rather bad, its very unreliable, thus its the "worst" part of the critchance randomness, right? Yes and No. In terms of randomness, yes; it is the worst part. But in terms of "impact", no! In the early laningphase 1 or 2 crits dont decide the hole game or the hole laningphase. The problem is if there are 2-3 lucky crits **in one trade!** If someone buys crit chance its expected that he/she crits you sometimes. A crit is "only" another free AA. Thats something that you should be able to roughly calculate/expect. But 2 or 3 crits in a 5 AA trade with only 10% crit? Thats a bit much! So its not the amount of crits that makes things nessecarily bad, its the amount of crits in a short time period that derail everything! And it goes the other way around with high amounts of crit chance too! Even with high critchance you can crit less than you would expect, and lategame every single crit can decide the game! The difference between 300 or 750 raw dmg at the end is much more impactful than ~80-100 more in the laningphase. >The problem is not just the random amount/ocurence, its the frequency of crits that makes things bad. Keep this in mind, its important for later! ____ **4. The problem with most suggestions/ crit alternatives** A lot of people suggest to change crit chance into a flat modifier, or something like "every x AA deals more dmg/bonus effect/becomes a crit" etc., or working like fevor, or something along those lines. _The big problem, a very big problem with all of them, is **abusability!**_ > Predictable, guaranteed "crits" are **extremely unheatly** for the game!!! Especially with low "crit chance". I cant stress this enough: If something can be abused, it WILL BE abused! Its the same with balance suggestions, always treat the "worst case" as the default one! And if the worst case looks bad than you need to tweak your suggestion. So any kind of "stacking" or x-hit thingy will not work. The can be abused to easly! Back then Trynda could "scout" if his next AA would crit by looking at his attack animation. If it was the start of his crit animation he cancels the AA and then goes in for a trade with a guaranteed crit! This was very unheatly and was abused a lot. This was luckly fixed, so if you cancel your crit animation you next AA is no longer guaranteed to be a crit. To make it short, we have 2 choices: - improve these suggestions, so they can no longer be abused - improve the current system, so these bad frequencies dont occure/ are limited I personally am ok with the current system, I do have a suggestion to make it even better, but if theres a good alternative I'm fine with that too! _____ _____ # The Math and my suggestion to improve the current situation ____ **5. Math, Math, Math** First off, congraz for making it here and still beeing awake! Not that many people here on boards would read such a massiv wall of text and I'm glad your not one of them! You have my respect. Since we are approching the limit of text that is endureable in one go, I'll skip the basics of PRD and just refere to an old post of mine. It is still valid, just some minor number tweaks especially in the higher critchance region have changed. It will explain how PRD works and will contain a length description and breakdown of my crit chance improvement suggestion. So if you want to torture yourself a bit, I recommend you get yourself some snacks and try to enjoy it as much as possible :D Heres the link to my old post, go to point 3. "More Math": [SummonersLab, Part 2: Crit Algorithem Improvement](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/Oe9PQnbE-summonerslab-part-2-crit-algorithem-improvement) And heres the link to a PRD breakdown: [PRD Basics](https://dota2.gamepedia.com/Pseudo-random_distribution) _____ **6. Super short PRD TL;DR:** If you have 50% crit chance, you actually only have a 25% chance to crit on your first AA! If this AA **DIDNT** crit,_ your next AA gets an additional +25% on top!_ So your 2nd AA has a 50% chance to crit. If your AA still did not crit, it gets another +25%, so it has a 75% chance to crit in total. If it still did not crit, it gets +25% again, so we arrive at 100%, which means this AA will guaranteed crit! After a crit you will reset back to the initial 25% crit chance. So this series of Crits: _C,C,C,C _ doesnt not have a **1/16 (~6%) chance** to occure _( 1/2x 1/2x 1/2x 1/2),_ it only has a** 1/64 to 1/256 (~1.6 - 0.4%) chance** to happen _(1/4x 1/4x 1/4x 1/4)_ ! As you can see getting alot of crits in a row is VERY unlikey! Even with decent crit chance. Keep this in mind the next time you see this, that person just got pretty lucky! ____ **7. My suggestion, a stricter PRD** Even with the PRD in place, which already makes the randomness a lot more fair, there are still some outliers present! It is for example possible to get a lot of crit in a row even with super low crit chance(<20%)! It is highly unlikely, but still possible. The same but a bit stricter can happen with high crit chance, since you reset back to the lower crit chance after a crit means that you have in general a lower critchance than you should have, in short periods. As a quick reminder: Over a longer period prd has the same outcome as normal crit chance, they are equal. But in shorter periods things can get wonky! (PRD is still a million times better than normal randomness, even in these cases) And thats what I want to improve! In short: We introduce caps to eliminate those outliers that can break "fairness" in shorter periods. We still wand to be random and also dont want to interfere with the normal PRD, we are only touching the troublesome outliers! These caps force us to have NonCritical AAs or guaranteed Crits based on the actual crit chance. Remember the amount of crits **IN A SHORT PERIOD** was the big problem we identified. Thats what those caps to fix. >**The Cap:** > > - **<=20% CritChance** = _2 NonCrits forced after a Crit_ > - **>20% - <40% CritChance** = _1 NonCrit forced after a Crit_ > - **>=40% - <50% CritChance** = _max. 2 Crits in a row (3rd AA will not crit)_ > - **>=50% - <60% CritChance** = _max 3 Crits in a row AND After 3 NonCritAAs in a row, your next 2 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ > - **>=60% - <80% CritChance** = _max. 5 Crits in a row AND After 2 NonCritAAs in a row, your next 2 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ > - **>=80% CritChance** = _After a NonCritAA, your next 3 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ Yes this is a tbit complicated, but basically these caps ensure that lucky AND unlucky outliers in high and low critchance get removed. If you have questions or want a more indepth explaination of this, just ask :D Reached letter limit again..
btw its now 5 am here and I wanted to got to sleep at 11pm... rip me xD Also to stay in the discussion, I feel that crit is fine, could use some improvement and alternatives to it are not ready yet. They still have problems :/ If someone has an idea that would get rid of these problems I would gladly hop on board! And also PRD can be abused, but it not really practical. My suggestion is even less likely to be abused even when I introduced alot of guaranteed crits (which is in general pretty risky/bad). And I'm sorry that my reply is not as "tailored" to your comment as it should be, but in this cases it makes alot of the explainations and reasonings easier :S If it helps I rewrote this monster 2 times and it was even longer in the earlier iterations, and I still managed to get to the letter limit again xD
: I look very much forward to it! If you'd like, I'd love to see the full version, along with the link to your old post.
______ Sooo, I'm finally done with this monster! I hope you enjoyed my old post :D First off, I will put most of the math at the end of this so it doesnt interfere that much and I can keep it a lot shorter that way :D And this comment is writen in a more general style, so guys who want to join our discussion have it easier to catch up. But its still an answer to your comment :P Let's get started! ____ ____ #The Good, the Bad, and the Crit Chance... - **1. Can Crit chance be removed?** - **2. Crit Chance not as bad as it seems?** - **3. The critchance problem** - **4. The problem with most suggestions/ crit alternatives** - **5. Math, Math, Math** - **6. Super short PRD TL;DR:** - **7. My suggestion, a stricter PRD** ___ **1. Can Crit chance be removed?** From a technical standpoint: Yes, definitely! It _is_ possible to remove it. But it might not be that easy! As you already mentioned, the game is already pretty complex. The "boringness" of AAs can mostly get removed by abilities, mechanics and the overall kit/theme of a champion. The removal of (controlled) randomness is also pretty good from a competativ standpoint, as it makes things absolutly fair. So, given a good alternative, crit chance can be removed! Before I go to the suggestions to replace critchance, I will quickly sum up some positves and its problem, for completions sake. ____ **2. Crit Chance not as bad as it seems?** Like stated before: crit chance is **not** pure random, this is very important! It uses PRD (pseudo random distribution), which is a very big improvement in terms of "fairness". To sum it up it looks at your previous attacks and modifies your critchance, instead of beeing completely independent, to get an overall more equal and less spikey outcome. I will explain it later with "some" (a ton of) math later. So to make it clear: Its not completely random, it already eliminats a big amount of bad cases, bad outliers. Crit chance does not only lower the "boringness"/"predictableness" of AAs by a bit, its made in a way that gives very rewarding visual feedback! The big number with the crit symbol, the chunk of the enemy healthbar and a crit animation/projectial, they all _feel_ exciting and rewarding. Not that "rewarding" for the recieving end but it will still get some excitment, a "holy shit, that dmg!", out of you :D > (Low) Crit chance is a double-edged sword, for you and your enemy! Let's look a bit deeper: crit chance, while beeing random, is still "fair" overall. It can bite you, but it can also bite your enemy! If you invest in crit chance, the first amount (<=30) is roughly wasted combat stats. Why? Because its still to unreliable! You cannot count on getting the amount of crits you "should" get, in short trades. If you always bet on your luck, it will backfire someday. So on the baseline you "waste" gold at the beginning, the risk is high. Obviously you can get lucky, but by the end of this comment you will look at low critchance and critstreaks with completely different eyes! To summarize it, if you invest gold into crit chance you have the right to get power for your money, but with low crit chance its more a risk than anything. You cant make reliable decisions on low critchance. ____ **3. The critchance problem** We now know that low critchance is rather bad, its very unreliable, thus its the "worst" part of the critchance randomness, right? Yes and No. In terms of randomness, yes; it is the worst part. But in terms of "impact", no! In the early laningphase 1 or 2 crits dont decide the hole game or the hole laningphase. The problem is if there are 2-3 lucky crits **in one trade!** If someone buys crit chance its expected that he/she crits you sometimes. A crit is "only" another free AA. Thats something that you should be able to roughly calculate/expect. But 2 or 3 crits in a 5 AA trade with only 10% crit? Thats a bit much! So its not the amount of crits that makes things nessecarily bad, its the amount of crits in a short time period that derail everything! And it goes the other way around with high amounts of crit chance too! Even with high critchance you can crit less than you would expect, and lategame every single crit can decide the game! The difference between 300 or 750 raw dmg at the end is much more impactful than ~80-100 more in the laningphase. >The problem is not just the random amount/ocurence, its the frequency of crits that makes things bad. Keep this in mind, its important for later! ____ **4. The problem with most suggestions/ crit alternatives** A lot of people suggest to change crit chance into a flat modifier, or something like "every x AA deals more dmg/bonus effect/becomes a crit" etc., or working like fevor, or something along those lines. _The big problem, a very big problem with all of them, is **abusability!**_ > Predictable, guaranteed "crits" are **extremely unheatly** for the game!!! Especially with low "crit chance". I cant stress this enough: If something can be abused, it WILL BE abused! Its the same with balance suggestions, always treat the "worst case" as the default one! And if the worst case looks bad than you need to tweak your suggestion. So any kind of "stacking" or x-hit thingy will not work. The can be abused to easly! Back then Trynda could "scout" if his next AA would crit by looking at his attack animation. If it was the start of his crit animation he cancels the AA and then goes in for a trade with a guaranteed crit! This was very unheatly and was abused a lot. This was luckly fixed, so if you cancel your crit animation you next AA is no longer guaranteed to be a crit. To make it short, we have 2 choices: - improve these suggestions, so they can no longer be abused - improve the current system, so these bad frequencies dont occure/ are limited I personally am ok with the current system, I do have a suggestion to make it even better, but if theres a good alternative I'm fine with that too! _____ _____ # The Math and my suggestion to improve the current situation ____ **5. Math, Math, Math** First off, congraz for making it here and still beeing awake! Not that many people here on boards would read such a massiv wall of text and I'm glad your not one of them! You have my respect. Since we are approching the limit of text that is endureable in one go, I'll skip the basics of PRD and just refere to an old post of mine. It is still valid, just some minor number tweaks especially in the higher critchance region have changed. It will explain how PRD works and will contain a length description and breakdown of my crit chance improvement suggestion. So if you want to torture yourself a bit, I recommend you get yourself some snacks and try to enjoy it as much as possible :D Heres the link to my old post, go to point 3. "More Math": [SummonersLab, Part 2: Crit Algorithem Improvement](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/Oe9PQnbE-summonerslab-part-2-crit-algorithem-improvement) And heres the link to a PRD breakdown: [PRD Basics](https://dota2.gamepedia.com/Pseudo-random_distribution) _____ **6. Super short PRD TL;DR:** If you have 50% crit chance, you actually only have a 25% chance to crit on your first AA! If this AA **DIDNT** crit,_ your next AA gets an additional +25% on top!_ So your 2nd AA has a 50% chance to crit. If your AA still did not crit, it gets another +25%, so it has a 75% chance to crit in total. If it still did not crit, it gets +25% again, so we arrive at 100%, which means this AA will guaranteed crit! After a crit you will reset back to the initial 25% crit chance. So this series of Crits: _C,C,C,C _ doesnt not have a **1/16 (~6%) chance** to occure _( 1/2x 1/2x 1/2x 1/2),_ it only has a** 1/64 to 1/256 (~1.6 - 0.4%) chance** to happen _(1/4x 1/4x 1/4x 1/4)_ ! As you can see getting alot of crits in a row is VERY unlikey! Even with decent crit chance. Keep this in mind the next time you see this, that person just got pretty lucky! ____ **7. My suggestion, a stricter PRD** Even with the PRD in place, which already makes the randomness a lot more fair, there are still some outliers present! It is for example possible to get a lot of crit in a row even with super low crit chance(<20%)! It is highly unlikely, but still possible. The same but a bit stricter can happen with high crit chance, since you reset back to the lower crit chance after a crit means that you have in general a lower critchance than you should have, in short periods. As a quick reminder: Over a longer period prd has the same outcome as normal crit chance, they are equal. But in shorter periods things can get wonky! (PRD is still a million times better than normal randomness, even in these cases) And thats what I want to improve! In short: We introduce caps to eliminate those outliers that can break "fairness" in shorter periods. We still wand to be random and also dont want to interfere with the normal PRD, we are only touching the troublesome outliers! These caps force us to have NonCritical AAs or guaranteed Crits based on the actual crit chance. Remember the amount of crits **IN A SHORT PERIOD** was the big problem we identified. Thats what those caps to fix. >**The Cap:** > > - **<=20% CritChance** = _2 NonCrits forced after a Crit_ > - **>20% - <40% CritChance** = _1 NonCrit forced after a Crit_ > - **>=40% - <50% CritChance** = _max. 2 Crits in a row (3rd AA will not crit)_ > - **>=50% - <60% CritChance** = _max 3 Crits in a row AND After 3 NonCritAAs in a row, your next 2 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ > - **>=60% - <80% CritChance** = _max. 5 Crits in a row AND After 2 NonCritAAs in a row, your next 2 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ > - **>=80% CritChance** = _After a NonCritAA, your next 3 AAs are guarenteed Crits_ Yes this is a tbit complicated, but basically these caps ensure that lucky AND unlucky outliers in high and low critchance get removed. If you have questions or want a more indepth explaination of this, just ask :D Reached letter limit again..
: I look very much forward to it! If you'd like, I'd love to see the full version, along with the link to your old post.
Change of planes: I finished the wall of text a while ago, but it was just to big and it wasnt that good to read, so I scrapped most of it and I'm trying to get it as resonably small as I can :/ In the mean time heres the link to my old post, so you dont get tooooo bored :P https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/Oe9PQnbE-summonerslab-part-2-crit-algorithem-improvement I'm trying to get done, but it could take still quiet a while, I'm a rather slow writer. Have mercy xD
: This board would be so much nicer if people learned to detach personal feelings from their arguments
I agree that way to many usefull discussions derail/get derailed because somebody felt that he/she got personally attacked. And then the reasoning goes out the window xD And also sadly when these rare discussions finally happen, at best a couple of guys will notice/join them :/ While raginess and saltiness dominate the frontpage by far. Its easier to unite vs a common enemy than to discuss things and come to conclusions that will actually do something to resolve the problem.
jadelink (OCE)
: I'd love a reply on this from RIOT. I remember the (horrible) crit-stack trynd rort, and how annoying it was to lane against someone had a guaranteed crit 'stacked' up their sleeve.
While I would love to get a Rioter to reply to this, but I dont think it will happen :/ I do have some very technical questions regarding Crit left unanswered, which are pretty much impossible to figure out/test by normal means. It would take serveral hundreds of hours and I still couldnt guarantee certanty of the results... I'm sorry to say but this "crit stacking" on trynda still works! Its a bit harder and its not really "guaranted", but you can still cheat the system to bring the odds a decent bit in your favor :/ Another trick for trynda was to cancel his AA when he saw the start of his crit animation. So hes know that he will crit with his next attack. This one luckly got patched :D
: I largely agree with this, and would personally be very interested in a pseudorandom number generator that would eliminate outliers already (if that isn't already the case). However, while I do agree that a certain level of unpredictability is necessary to keep sports fresh and interesting, I'm not sure randomness is needed even in that kind of situation, since League has a sufficiently complex framework that, given enough balancing, it can have such a vast number of strategies and interactions that it would not be easy to predict a game's outcome. I very much agree with your stance on controlled chaos, and how it can benefit gameplay, which is why, even with my personal distaste for RNG, I do think there is room for some randomness, as long as it presents equal opportunities for both teams. This is why I don't really think the randomness to drakes is inherently bad (how those random drakes interact with swings in team momentum I think might be a problem, though), though it's also why I think stuff like crit or Zoe's W are terrible for good gameplay. I also am very much on board with you when you say that the basic playstyle of marksmen would be fairly boring without the inconsistency of crit, since many of them would just be very constant damage pumps. However, I think this is already the case, and crit here only acts as a smokescreen to distract from it. Crit I think innately has no real gameplay, so the end result is that the damage output of marksman also lacks interesting gameplay (though marksmen have a lot of potential for interactivity nonetheless). Because of this, I also agree that any replacement to crit should not simply convert the stat into a persistent damage modifier, but should legitimately add gameplay and emphasize components to the playstyle of marksmen that are more interactive (e.g. attacking for a prolonged amount of time, rather than just once or twice).
I'm sorry, I would love to further discuss this topic you with right now, but its getting pretty late over here in EU. And I do have a lot to discuss, it is a wall of text so be ready :D I will hopefully get it done by tomorrow, to tired to finish and to roughly spell check this monster right now. As a bonus: How much do you know/want to know about PRD/ my stricter version? a) I can give you a link to an old post of mine where I explained it decently, might be a bit outdated now but should still be valid for the most part :D b) a somewhat "short" tl;dr: with the basic principals c) the full version
HarrowR (EUNE)
: Well its funny you generalize all adcs as boring right clickers where there is no zero or hero mechanic,you seem to forget theres a lot of skill heavy adcs,Jhin,Ezreal,Xayah,Varus,Lucian,even kog has 3 skillshots,Draven has two skillshots and a mechanic that requires him to move and catch the axes,Kalista has a similiar mechanic where the skill of the player has great influence on the success of playing her. Most of the time the outplay of adcs isnt about whos gonna crit or not,its about whos gonna kite better,which is a skill in its own cause it takes hella of a lot more APM to kite a melee with an adc than with lux where you just throw your spells out and keep walking
You cleary missunderstood my point xD I'm not talking about the complexity or abilities or mechanics or skill of adcs! I'm just saying that adcs gameplay mostly resolves around their autoattacks and that you cannot dogde them with skill (except for some spezial cases like jax e, or twitch r aso). And if you cannot dogde/avoid something with skill, it becomes pretty predictable and rather "boring" compared to skillshots which always can miss completely. My point stands: You cannot outplay the rightclick, aka AAs, which makes AAs in general less exciting. Technically point and click abilities are also on the "boring" side, as a sidenode. My point is that crit chance wants and does make AAs alot more unpredictable, thus more "interesting". I'm not saying that crit is good or bad, it just fullfilles this spezial purpose and also not that all adcs are just boring rightclickers. The AAs are boring, not the Adcs themselfs! Thats my point. Nothing more and nothing less. Hope that clearifies things a little :D
: The Aspects of Balance Nobody talks about: Player Skill, Balance Cycle and Riot spoiling Players
Just a quick comment: > And yes, there will be cases where the outlier is so severe that the character NEEDS to be taken care of (Zoe for example). These cases are just that though: Outliers. Things that occur once or twice a year depending on how complex the game is. Well IF it would only happen once or twice a year! Almost every 2nd month they create big outliers.... And the problem is not that they randomly pop up and surprise everyone! Look at AP Galio back then or Zoe or Duskblades Dmg output! These are not surprising results, someone with a bit of knowledge should be able to predict this.... And they have testers on a high elo level and years of experience. Those "slip ups" are completely of the charts. I can understand mistakes or rather unpredictable things, small changes with a bigger impact than expected, but not these big mess ups. Its only human to make mistakes and nobody is perfect, but I also have the right to get some roughly thought out changes from those professionals and not a fiesta every 3-4th patch.... But as a sidenode: Quiet often it feels like they "fix" something which should settle a bit longer before they touch it, and they often make changes which I cannot understand nor follow thru. Like messing with something that has nothing to do with the actual problem and tweaking that will not really fix it xD Its not like I'm perfect and know everything, but I decently often have a rather different, but also backed up, opinion on some of their changes. To put everything together: It feels like those "misshaps" happen way more frequently and often are decently predictable. We are talking about professionals after all! Then some changes are done which arent making much sense, as they dont target the core problem directly, but some other random stuff. And thats why their "balancing" is often called pretty bad. Personally speaking it definetly feels worse than before, but calling it complete trash, thats to much in my book.
Exibir mais

Lord Desert

Nível 31 (EUW)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão