: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=PAEEsOvZ,comment-id=00180000,timestamp=2019-09-17T01:42:34.021+0000) > > Well, that's hard to quantify but let's think about it in some ways: > > So you have anywhere from 5-10 people working on it from QA to art to modeling, VFX, etc. Now let's say 9-5 with no Overtime for the span of three months. 40 hour work weeks. Plus let's be super cruel and make them all make 15/hr. > > One employee (for a skin to take 3 months at 15/hr) costs about 7k. So this skin costs anywhere from 36,000 to 72000 to make. And this is lowballing it pretty grossly considering not everyone is going to make 15/hr, overtime pay, taking longer than 3 months, etc. if it takes you that long to makes a skin.. you guys have some problems.. are the paint brushes made from caviar? And with all that money spent i still dont like this skin. = partial failure.
> [{quoted}](name=AramSlayer,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=PAEEsOvZ,comment-id=001800000000,timestamp=2019-09-17T04:51:26.878+0000) > > if it takes you that long to makes a skin.. you guys have some problems.. > are the paint brushes made from caviar? > And with all that money spent i still dont like this skin. > = partial failure. One, I ain't Riot. Two, video game development/creation of cosmetics does take a long-ass time. Source: I work in QA (Just not at Riot) And three, that's the gamble you take. There's always the chance that the thing you make totally flops. Do you think the guy who originally set out to make OG urgot said to himself "man this champ gonna be DOGSHIT".
: Okay, so the skin made less than her yearly salary. Did it cost her yearly salary to _make_ the skin?
> [{quoted}](name=Everyday Legends,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=PAEEsOvZ,comment-id=0018,timestamp=2019-09-16T13:30:16.640+0000) > > Okay, so the skin made less than her yearly salary. > Did it cost her yearly salary to _make_ the skin? Well, that's hard to quantify but let's think about it in some ways: So you have anywhere from 5-10 people working on it from QA to art to modeling, VFX, etc. Now let's say 9-5 with no Overtime for the span of three months. 40 hour work weeks. Plus let's be super cruel and make them all make 15/hr. One employee (for a skin to take 3 months at 15/hr) costs about 7k. So this skin costs anywhere from 36,000 to 72000 to make. And this is lowballing it pretty grossly considering not everyone is going to make 15/hr, overtime pay, taking longer than 3 months, etc.
: the ones that are buffed the most and most forgiving are the huge sales. ivern/sol are unpopular due to uniqueness in kit and being "boring", thus no one plays them. if they were overtuned people would play them thus making skin sales go up. i dont believe rioters. ive seen them lie first hand plenty of times. just because they used to be a rioter doesnt mean they are some almighty trustworthy being
> [{quoted}](name=XJ99999999999999,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=PAEEsOvZ,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-09-15T01:54:04.684+0000) > > the ones that are buffed the most and most forgiving are the huge sales. ivern/sol are unpopular due to uniqueness in kit and being "boring", thus no one plays them. if they were overtuned people would play them thus making skin sales go up. > > i dont believe rioters. ive seen them lie first hand plenty of times. just because they used to be a rioter doesnt mean they are some almighty trustworthy being I mean they are kind of trustworthy because they, y'know. Worked there. This also isn't some drink-the-koolaid positive thing: It's saying that something they worked on and considered to be a good investment was a massive financial loss, which is pretty damning to say about their production line. I'd also say that overtuned/overpowered isn't always a metric on if people will play that champion. There are plenty of strong champions that aren't seeing play because they're an insanely niche character and/or require time investment. Champions can still boast amazing win-rates yet far smaller playrates because they're just not appealing to a wide variety of people. You can't really just look at balance because a champion is never just their gameplay: They're a character with voice lines, looks, etc etc etc. Even if you swapped Ivern and Yasuo's kits I'd argue that a ton of people would still play Yasuo because he's a cool samurai dude (who I guess now has a stand?) while only a few more people would play happy tree man.
: That HAS to have been either Mecha Sol or Dunkmaster Ivern. There's just no other answer. Or a similarly flopped release a longer time ago.
> [{quoted}](name=KestrelGirl,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=PAEEsOvZ,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-15T01:31:43.657+0000) > > That HAS to have been either Mecha Sol or Dunkmaster Ivern. There's just no other answer. Or a similarly flopped release a longer time ago. It's hard to say considering it's just a "Well made skin". The question is was it well-made or was it well-received? There are definitely things to dig into but man, it's super hard to tell.
Comentários de Rioters
: Why everyone is ragequitting even in ranked now?
Weak mental. People buy into the "gg 2-0 at 8 minutes FF". They start caring less, feeding further, etc. "Never say die" mentality is gone because people find any game that's not a basic absolute stomp or a 1-1 slugfest completely unwinnable. Games can still be brought back but frankly you can't bring anything back when your mid laner mentally afks because Irelia is 2-0 with 50 CS at 13 minutes.
Win1Ocent (EUW)
: @RiotBlaustoise on mobility
>TL:DR. High mobile champs are not played more because they are by nature more fun, but because they have more options and more ways to do well. It's kind of hard to determine really. Honestly I disagree with both Blaust and OP on this one because I feel the metric for "what makes a champion fun" varies greatly based on player. We see champions some people would consider fuck-off boring (like, say, Volibear) get played a ton because they're meta. Likewise, Jinx is one of League's ADCs with no mobility or way to escape save for a finnicky passive. Despite this, she's one of the highest played champions even when she's absolute trash. In the end "what's fun" is such a variable metric that you can't really pinpoint what is "fun" in league without polling the entire global playerbase. Even then, your answer is just what the majority of players find fun, not what is unconditionally fun for everyone. The good thing about league right now is that pretty much every class is viable, albeit with meta as it always is the amount of "This is overwhelmingly strong" champs often fall under about 1-2 champs in each class.
Madjack01 (EUW)
: No. Actually facing people with limited champ pools and having unfair comps is what you signed up for. If you don't like it, too bad. People will never invest in the entire champion pool nor should they be forced too because you want to try to enforce fairness in a mode that is intrinsically unfair. I don't like to play more than 2/3s of the roster (and that includes nonsense like Jayce, Xerath or Ziggs). Even with a limited champ pool I have trouble getting a champ I enjoy. Might as well kiss goodbye to the mode if have to play all the shit I purposely avoided in all other modes by not buying them.
> [{quoted}](name=Madjack01,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uf3dwxsq,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-09-08T09:10:43.494+0000) > > No. > > Actually facing people with limited champ pools and having unfair comps is what you signed up for. If you don't like it, too bad. > > People will never invest in the entire champion pool nor should they be forced too because you want to try to enforce fairness in a mode that is intrinsically unfair. I don't like to play more than 2/3s of the roster (and that includes nonsense like Jayce, Xerath or Ziggs). Even with a limited champ pool I have trouble getting a champ I enjoy. Might as well kiss goodbye to the mode if have to play all the shit I purposely avoided in all other modes by not buying them You got rerolls for that. Rerolls you'd be getting 1-2 of every game because with 140+ characters, you're bound to have the occasional one you dislike. And hey, unless you hate over 75% of the roster you're bound to get champs you either enjoy or don't mind playing a ton of the time. And naw, I didn't sign up for "limited champ pools and unfair comps every game". I signed up for "Everyone gets a random champion and you make do with a random team". The failure is on Riot for not putting forth what is advertised here. "ARAM" is all random all mid. Not "All certain champions I like to play all mid". But all this is proving is that Riot will just cater to those who think in a similar fashion: I only want to play 10 very specific (coincidentally poke) champions every single game and I'll keep droppin' them dollah dollah bills if ya give me what I want.
BigFBear (EUW)
: Who else enjoys "League of 15 Champs" as much as me this season?
The one crippling flaw here is win rate. Most champs here hover over sub-50% or just barely over 50% (by like 0.1 point) while only two actively crack it. Then you look at who is actually winning most of the games: https://puu.sh/EeLwr/45fc17012c.png Out of this "league of 15 champions", only one actively shows up on the actual top winrates. It's also not like these champions are played exclusively by 0.01% of players. Several of these champions sport around 5-10% pick rates. And I'm sure you'll go "YEAH WELL WHAT ABOUT THE NEXT GROUP!? HA! CHECKMATE!" Well... https://puu.sh/EeLy3/ed0cdf59bf.png Less 5-10% pick rates, still fairly widespread pick rate. Despite this "league of 15 champions", plenty of champions are not only viable but quite amazing to play. Despite a so-called "pick-meta-to-win" meta, the best performers by a wide margin are champions people often harp as weak: Tanks. Juggernauts. Non-mobile champions. If anything, this website proves how the current stable of viable-and-good champions is quite deep while those who default to popular picks end up losing more games than those that play to the amazing-but-less-popular-champs. It seems that if you really want to win, maybe don't follow the sheep off the cliff and remove your cursor from that 8th game in a row Ezreal pick. EDIT: Also figured I should compare to the worldwide pick rates as you point out. https://puu.sh/EeLD4/6471b3391b.png In M+ tiers, you do end up seeing those popular champs picked again. So that is a point towards the meta argument. But when you look at win rates... https://puu.sh/EeLDW/45fd54b0fd.png Once again, most of the popular squad is absent save Jinx and Lee Sin who tend to be played regardless of meta as they're both quite popular. Once again, the "meta staples" are absent from the worldwide. Once again, there's a smattering of mages, tanks, assassins, ADCs and fighters. Now if you really want to argue something, maybe pick at how 6 of the 10 top win-rate champions in the game are junglers of all persuasions including tanks, mages, assassins and generalists.
: Why do you play aram if you don't like it? I mostly play summoner's rift by the way.
> [{quoted}](name=redLizardrock,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uf3dwxsq,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-08T08:41:10.820+0000) > > Why do you play aram if you don't like it? I mostly play summoner's rift by the way. That's the thing: I do like ARAM. It's my one chance to play some champs outside of roles/SR because I never really could play them elsewhere. Save Nexus Blitz, which I loved. (Although I understand why Riot removed it. RIP) It also lets me play some more meme-y builds. AP Miss Fortune. On-hit Bard. AD Thresh. etc etc. Plus I'm an old vet, having all the champs unlocked, but this puts me at a disadvantage against people who have accounts tailored to play ARAM. It's really just not fair. Not because of balance, design, gameplay or any outside factor. It's just the core account system of ARAM.
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=MjrsLTba,comment-id=007d,timestamp=2019-09-05T06:13:23.007+0000) > > I don't really dig that they're in these kinda awkward Microsoft word-style variants that make it a hassle for me to read. > > Would you care if I converted it into a possible excel format? Wouldn't mind at all :)
> [{quoted}](name=Xenogenic,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=MjrsLTba,comment-id=007d0000,timestamp=2019-09-05T08:01:30.488+0000) > > Wouldn't mind at all :) Sounds good bro. Will help you out soon.
: Eternals Feedback Thread: Set 1 Uniques
I don't really dig that they're in these kinda awkward Microsoft word-style variants that make it a hassle for me to read. Would you care if I converted it into a possible excel format?
: つ ◕_◕ ༽つ MODS ARE MURDER つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
I'd post that old "just taking my mods for a walk" emoji but that one would probably not go over well lmao.
Mayobe (NA)
: So we had WC, then WoW, then DotA, then LoL, and now you want to go back to WoW? More importantly, what is it about the current state of affairs with Riot that makes anyone think for a moment that they'd be capable of managing such an enterprise?
> [{quoted}](name=Mayobe,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=H5AVYKTE,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-09-01T03:39:09.478+0000) > > So we had WC, then WoW, then DotA, then LoL, and now you want to go back to WoW? > > More importantly, what is it about the current state of affairs with Riot that makes anyone think for a moment that they'd be capable of managing such an enterprise? Absolutely. The problem with MMOs always falls onto playability. Only a handful of MMOs still survive today and their playability ranges from "It's pretty good" to "unironically on death's doorstep". I have no doubt Riot could make an MMO that's functional, playable and even decent-to-good. The question is if they can get a profit from it and make continuous, good content.
: Moderators are getting more and more pandering towards blind riotism. Really kind of depressing, but understandable from someone who has to lick feet to keep their position.
> [{quoted}](name=LatetotheRace,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=HW8ABzQI,comment-id=00040004,timestamp=2019-08-31T23:51:21.191+0000) > > Moderators are getting more and more pandering towards blind riotism. Really kind of depressing, but understandable from someone who has to lick feet to keep their position. It's less "blatant pandering" and more so facts. Truth is Riot has always catered far too much to casuals, much to the detriment of game health, and now we're at the point in the games life cycle where further catering to casual play is going to do irreparable damage to the game because a casual playerbase will always move on while pros are left with a game that attempted to chase that market. WoW classic perfect example of this: Blizzard spent years chasing after the casual market and constantly making changes to benefit said market. Fewer people play now than their peak. Yet a return to the good/original market (Notice that most of the people playing WoW classic _aren't_ casuals but the most dedicated hardcore crowd) is met with applause. If anything, Riot caters far too much to casuals and it's about time they start focusing on good play. Hell, doesn't even have to be pro scene: Diamond 2+ is a great metric. Plat's certainly not high ranking and medium plat balancing is a joke. Just ask any high-ranking streamer, pro or even board users here.
: The thing I hate most about Worlds time
Caters to PUB play year round. "zzzz rito never listen 2 us" Makes balance changes focused around pros for around 1-2 months. "WTF RIOT CATER TO LC$ YET AGAIN".
Bazerka (NA)
: I'm on my lunch break again! Lets chat :D
: Riot Games is Starting to Act Like Wargaming. I Don't Want Riot to Fail Like They Did.
> [{quoted}](name=ThornsofDarkness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KMXutfii,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-08-29T03:12:40.980+0000) > > 1. Latest releases of playable characters are almost always better and stronger than the legacy roster. Flat out wrong. In fact often some of the outright strongest characters are the oldest/older ones. Ezreal, Braum, Alistar, Tahm Kench, Lee Sin, etc. > 2. Latest releases always come with a new gimmick or mechanic that makes the strong and chip away at the games consistency and integrity. This is what happens as games get older and every game does this. That said, the new mechanics rarely "chip away at consistency or integrity" barring few examples. > 3. Out of date playable characters get updated slowly and either underperform or act as a new playable character(see #1 and #2). Often because these characters are from a bygone error and have aged horribly. Also the fact that sometimes they take up a thematic niche (Such as Akali's stealthy ninja or Aatrox's overwhelmingly powerful demonic swordsman) and you can't just design a new champ to fill that void without overwriting them. > 4. After experimenting with quality (Limited Time ;-;) and incredibly fun mini modes(PvE and others) scrap them entirely. Because the actual amount of people playing them did not justify the development cost. (NB had under 3% playrate while TFT is still cruising at around 40%) > 5. Spend a lot of time developing new games to add to the IP, leaving your current game to lag behind. I wouldn't say lag behind. Different teams. > 6. Add loot boxes in every form possible. Not really true and unlike many other games that rely on boxes, you can still directly purchase what you want. > 7. Add player rewards that are more disappointing than exciting. (IE Emotes and "You could get a skin" chests) yeah true. > 8. Fail to properly support community communication. (Riot STILL doesn't have an _actual_ voice chat.) Agreed here. The lack of voice chat outside of premades is lame as fuck. > 9. Fail to properly support the best aspects of the game. (Clash is taking how long to work out?) I mean they could have cancelled clash but they're not only actively working on it but frequently update the status of it. If they really failed to support it, they'd say "yeah fuck it" and leave it be. > 10. Ignore the community response on your PBE. Bad place for feedback tbh. Around 1/100000th of the playerbase with incredibly low skill bar. It's not a good place to see the game's state at all. > 11. Ignore community response whenever you feel like it. Which comes down to NA being a fraction of a fraction of the playerbase. It's clear that they do listen to some degree but you have to understand them not always being on-call for boards is not because "omng they hate us" but because of the size of boards being incredibly small as well as the general consensus being that boards is a place you go to complain and speak english. > 12. Monetizing anything and everything you possibly can. (Immortals... What else is there to say but, "Wow.... just wow.") Not true. While Eternals sucks, they've actually removed monetization on runes and actual gameplay is still unmonitized. Nothing's really changed here except Eternals being shit. tl;dr some of these are true and valid (Voice comms especially), others are kind of completely missing points and/or accusing things as slippery slope. There are better arguments to make overall.
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000100000004000000010000,timestamp=2019-08-23T16:44:29.240+0000) > > Yes. > > The thing with a pro scene is that there has to be competitive depth, difficulty and room to improve. Many of the things required to make casuals have a better time mean having key aspects of these removed in favor of sanding off edges. To use your own example, Galio flash-W timing (while simple) was still something that required planning, foresight and using a resources that as you put is often used to escape. Now the option no longer exists, making the game simpler because rather than balance Galio around pros we have to remove aspects so he's easier to balance around pros and casuals. > > Pros and high ELOs need things catered to them because they're the apex and the best. They should be rewarded for reaching that state, not told "Well you put forth a lot of time, effort and skill to get good at this game so we're gonna say fuck you and balance around the guy who is terrible _but_ he sometimes gives us money like you do." Good luck with the argument since people are leaving more and more. If Esport is everything to you and you just ignore those casual players, good luck for keeping this game alive. There are not enough new players to compensate for those leavers. Hell yeah balance for the 0.0001% and let this game die.
> [{quoted}](name=John Westlin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0001000000040000000100000000,timestamp=2019-08-24T19:35:00.785+0000) > > Good luck with the argument since people are leaving more and more. If Esport is everything to you and you just ignore those casual players, good luck for keeping this game alive. There are not enough new players to compensate for those leavers. Hell yeah balance for the 0.0001% and let this game die. As previously pointed out, two of the longest running games (Counter Strike and DOTA) have almost exclusive pro-tier balance. Smash melee is no longer played by casuals yet still has a dedicated fan base that pulls in numbers. Fighting games from the 90s still have players hosting locals and scenes. You've got the inverse PoV: Balancing for high tier is how the game SURVIVES. Balancing for casuals is how the game DIES. Casuals will eventually leave regardless of how the game caters to them because they are fickle. Pros and high-tier will stick with the game because they actually love it. But sure, let's keep balancing for casuals as the game continues to have them leave. At least with pro-balance we'll come out of this with a strong competitive game that can be played by a smaller playerbase for years to come, rather than a casualized game that has no audience because it continued to chase after a massive, fickle mob.
: Can we please have a dynamic meta again?
>I'm seeing a pattern that has developed over the past several seasons that I find VERY problematic. I think a lot of it has to do with the broad reworks across entire classes, or entire item sets, but I also think A LOT of it is intentional by Riot. The pattern is that rather than working towards a universal sense of unified balance across styles of play, Riot seems to have decided on a single style of play that they deem "correct" and just pushed that forward, rapidly removing options. Let me illustrate with examples: Actually, it's usually the players who cause this to happen. Let's take some recent examples of where new picks come out: * Viktor top lane: Deemed "cancer". Community outcry forces it to die. * Aatrox/Urgot/Irelia mid: Deemed "cancer". Community outcry which eventually forces changes for all three. * Non-ADC Bot lanes: ADC players rage so hard they revert a good chunk of ADC changes. * Solo lane Tristana: Again, deemed as a sign of bad times. I don't believe it's gotten changes yet? * Tank Driver Yuumi (Yuumi + Tanky DPS like Garen): Yall know where this one is going. For a community that preaches about how it misses "diversity" and "unique picks", the moment one appears it's deemed unfun, wrong, or "not using the character as they should be". I can't imagine if original Sion or AP Yi existed today. Those champs would have been gutted so hard they'd have never existed in history.
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0001000000040000,timestamp=2019-08-22T16:07:47.547+0000) > > It's actually a pretty right choice because pro scenes carry the game longer than the casual scene. > > Look at DOTA. Look at CS:GO. Look at Starcraft 1. Are these games still around because they catered to the casual player? Nope! In fact, they've actually said "fuck the casual" in 95% of circumstances and told players to get good. As of today they're now some of the longest running competitive games because this focus on pro-balance has made the game rewarding to master, not dumbing it down so that the casual players who will likely leave the moment things don't go their way can have fun. > > For both game quality and longevity, pro balance _is_ the way to go. History proves it. I get what you're saying but do you honestly think the pro scene would vanish if they catered to the casual player? I fully agree that champs shouldn't be dumbed down, but I also think pros could be a little more adaptable. Like the galio flash taunt being removed. While all champs don't have the peel to necessarily avoid it, it was a known risk, not to mention made up for galio's reduced movement speed. I think it was also a nice spin on the use of flash imo. Flash is typically used as an escape or to secure a kill, but using it as an all in engage tactic was pretty wild. Also saying history proves something when the reverse hasn't been tested is a fallacy.
> [{quoted}](name=SirLanc3lot,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=00010000000400000001,timestamp=2019-08-23T16:30:10.581+0000) > > I get what you're saying but do you honestly think the pro scene would vanish if they catered to the casual player? I fully agree that champs shouldn't be dumbed down, but I also think pros could be a little more adaptable. Like the galio flash taunt being removed. While all champs don't have the peel to necessarily avoid it, it was a known risk, not to mention made up for galio's reduced movement speed. I think it was also a nice spin on the use of flash imo. Flash is typically used as an escape or to secure a kill, but using it as an all in engage tactic was pretty wild. Also saying history proves something when the reverse hasn't been tested is a fallacy. Yes. The thing with a pro scene is that there has to be competitive depth, difficulty and room to improve. Many of the things required to make casuals have a better time mean having key aspects of these removed in favor of sanding off edges. To use your own example, Galio flash-W timing (while simple) was still something that required planning, foresight and using a resources that as you put is often used to escape. Now the option no longer exists, making the game simpler because rather than balance Galio around pros we have to remove aspects so he's easier to balance around pros and casuals. Pros and high ELOs need things catered to them because they're the apex and the best. They should be rewarded for reaching that state, not told "Well you put forth a lot of time, effort and skill to get good at this game so we're gonna say fuck you and balance around the guy who is terrible _but_ he sometimes gives us money like you do."
: /dev: Changes to Eternals
Better. Still no ideal, but better. Hopefully they make it more worth it and/or eventually have rare eternals show up in BE.
: If this game were anywhere remotely being balanced around the pro scene, don't you think more champions would be viable in the pro scene? Spring LCS Statistics: 85 champions picked. 85 out of 145 picked over an entire season, that's 58%. For comparison, 81% of DotA heroes were picked _on the very first day_ of TI9 this past week. Something tells me League isn't being balanced for either pro or casual play.
> [{quoted}](name=Bad Footwear,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OdEOR6HX,comment-id=0011,timestamp=2019-08-22T23:58:20.065+0000) > > If this game were anywhere remotely being balanced around the pro scene, don't you think more champions would be viable in the pro scene? > > Something tells me League isn't being balanced for either pro or casual play. Naw, you're misreading. He's saying people who think the game should be balanced around high ELO/pro scene are dumb. Because you know there are a gorillion casuals each one ready and willing to drop giant stacks of cash which will keep the light on. It's pretty much a direct response to my thread that Riot has to pick a side, with me siding on the fact that pros/high elo should be the ones catered to as they're the best and will stick with the game long after the casual population has moved on.
: The problem with this logic is games like fortnite exist. Catering to the streamer who is probably platinum+ and pugging, is probably going to be the future. Also, designing around pro play only is a mistake because pros have some things that pugs never will: communication and a coach. Pros work together all year on communicating and coordinating alongside their coach. They've been practicing around how to use specific champs and combos for weeks or months. There's no way pugs will ever pull that off and frankly designing for the pros is a mistake. The heart of the game is the pugs. The financial lifeblood of the game is the pugs. Riot's best advertizers are the streamers, most of which are pug players. Riot needs to go back to balancing and designing around plat, which is where people have mechanically mastered the game.
> [{quoted}](name=Linna Excel,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=00010000000400000000,timestamp=2019-08-22T17:24:48.836+0000) > > The problem with this logic is games like fortnite exist. > > Catering to the streamer who is probably platinum+ and pugging, is probably going to be the future. Also, designing around pro play only is a mistake because pros have some things that pugs never will: communication and a coach. Pros work together all year on communicating and coordinating alongside their coach. They've been practicing around how to use specific champs and combos for weeks or months. > > There's no way pugs will ever pull that off and frankly designing for the pros is a mistake. The heart of the game is the pugs. The financial lifeblood of the game is the pugs. Riot's best advertizers are the streamers, most of which are pug players. > > Riot needs to go back to balancing and designing around plat, which is where people have mechanically mastered the game. There's no problem with that logic because Fortnite has been around for a handful of years compared to both those games and there is absolutely no telling if the game can sustain itself forever. You're essentially comparing a 2 year old to a 20 year old and going "See? Both ways work". If Fortnite is around for that long yeah, maybe you have a point. However every casual game is either gone and/or has a tiny playerbase of dedicated individuals who still play. And frankly the tier should be much higher than plat+. D2 or higher is around where real high ELO is while the other elos are filled with a variety of things. Designing and balancing around plat can't happen anymore due to how plat has changed as well as the changing scale of ability in this game. Casuals got the game to where it is. Pros are what will keep it around for years to come.
JoeMG (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2019-08-22T04:22:18.967+0000) > > This _always_ gets brought up and no, it does not work. > > Part of what drew competitive people to league was the story that "anyone can climb and be the best". Anyone can rise up in the ranks, go pro, etc. Beyond this, let's go with the idea that there are now a pro and a pug LoL: > > * 1.) Pro games are now nothing like PUGs. This kills advertisement potential because players are using entirely different champions. Seeing a sick play on Azir and being hyped up to play him, only to realize he's totally different from the Pro version you were just watching. > > * 2.) No pros can stream or practice and likewise, those looking to go pro are now fucked for playing on a "normal" server because the game completely changes. > > * 3.) You've now doubled the work needed for league. And no, that's not a good thing. You'll have to completely change the game and there's not even a way for players to be aware of buffs/nerfs in the pro scene without patch notes. Not to mention the bugs that have to now be tested between pro/pug versions. > > In addition, no game does pro/pug balancing different. Not even a game like smash brothers, in which you can modify the champs with options. Everyone plays the exact same unless a player takes it upon themselves to create house rules and modify champions. League would be the first and (quite likely) the last for the dumpster fire this would cause. Off the top of my head, Halo 3 and Halo Reach had separate settings for MLG. Move speed and damage modifiers were used to make the game more fast paced. The thing about that was that the MLG variants were also available as a playlist in the game. We know Riot loves removing playlists as opposed to adding them so something like this would never happen anyway.
> [{quoted}](name=JoeMG,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000b00000000,timestamp=2019-08-22T16:54:16.988+0000) > > Off the top of my head, Halo 3 and Halo Reach had separate settings for MLG. Move speed and damage modifiers were used to make the game more fast paced. The thing about that was that the MLG variants were also available as a playlist in the game. We know Riot loves removing playlists as opposed to adding them so something like this would never happen anyway. And notice how neither took off nor is played competitively anymore. Meanwhile CS is still competitively viable and frequently in gameplay. You also have to account for the fact that there is damage tuning and recoil. Comparatively, league and other strategy games can't coast on damage and number tuning for pro play. If they were to balance for pro play, they would have to gut mechanics and abilities. Which means they would be vastly different from each other. A more comparative idea would be if weapons lost/gained major components, such has the energy sword having a massively increased while in the other mode it doesn't even have a charge. Either way, separate balancing is the wrong way to go. You want custom games, I agree, but actual queues for pros and pugs is the wrong way to go.
: Should be optimally played. The problem is that you then only cater to .0001% of the playerbase, and completely ignore and disenfranchise everyone else. Like I posted up above though, there should be two versions of balance in league. One for pros and one for solo Queue running simultaneously. I genuinely believe that would actually REDUCE the time and money need to balance the game for a number of reasons.
> [{quoted}](name=ImTheJuggernauty,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000100000005,timestamp=2019-08-22T16:43:09.263+0000) > > Should be optimally played. The problem is that you then only cater to .0001% of the playerbase, and completely ignore and disenfranchise everyone else. > > Like I posted up above though, there should be two versions of balance in league. One for pros and one for solo Queue running simultaneously. I genuinely believe that would actually REDUCE the time and money need to balance the game for a number of reasons. Just gonna [permalink](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/rc3q2V7w-galio-is-the-perfect-example-of-modern-league?show=flat&comment=000b0000) this comment because it sums up the reasoning why balancing for two different versions doesn't work.
: Well in Dota 2 98% of champion rooster is playable and played despite here in lol.
> [{quoted}](name=Neumím Riven,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OdEOR6HX,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-08-22T10:36:55.993+0000) > > Well in Dota 2 98% of champion rooster is playable and played despite here in lol. The magic of pro-focused gameplay. Highly diverse and fun gameplay that's exciting to watch.
Destaice (NA)
: “This champion is too strong in pro play so now nobody gets to play it.”
Yep, for the longevity of the game that's the way to go. Do you think DOTA lasted almost two decades because they catered to casuals? Do you think CS:GO has lasted as long as it has because it gives cookies to the dude in the lowest rank? Nope. High-tier balance has repeatedly proved that it's the right choice when it comes to keeping games fresh and relevant. The fact is casuals leave the moment they don't get their way, taking their large-but-temporary revenue stream with them. This means that your game has to survive on the dedicated ones and a thriving pro scene. We're seeing it right now in-fact: Casual players aren't getting their way so they threaten to leave the game in droves. Meanwhile the high tier/pros stick around because they both enjoy the game and/or are doing it for a career. If League balances around pros (or even just high ELO ala D2+), casuals will eventually leave but you'll have a dedicated, hardcore fanbase that will stick with the game for years to go. If League balances around casuals, casuals will play the game for a little while longer until they eventually leave, leaving you with a simplistic game made for the common player which has no lasting power as pros have moved on.
Xonra (NA)
: This is such a dumb argument in 2019. When you have millions of people playing you shouldn't say "Screw you casual guy, too bad you aren't a pro player" and only balance for pro play. That is honestly stupid and that argument is the dumbest thing.
> [{quoted}](name=CallMeBoomer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000100000004,timestamp=2019-08-22T13:00:37.992+0000) > > This is such a dumb argument in 2019. When you have millions of people playing you shouldn't say "Screw you casual guy, too bad you aren't a pro player" and only balance for pro play. That is honestly stupid and that argument is the dumbest thing. It's actually a pretty right choice because pro scenes carry the game longer than the casual scene. Look at DOTA. Look at CS:GO. Look at Starcraft 1. Are these games still around because they catered to the casual player? Nope! In fact, they've actually said "fuck the casual" in 95% of circumstances and told players to get good. As of today they're now some of the longest running competitive games because this focus on pro-balance has made the game rewarding to master, not dumbing it down so that the casual players who will likely leave the moment things don't go their way can have fun. For both game quality and longevity, pro balance _is_ the way to go. History proves it.
K3ars3n (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-08-22T01:38:46.262+0000) > > And it's not because "bweh bweh bweh tanks bad :(" > > Galio is the ultimate example of the problem Riot continues to (and will forever run into): Balancing for pro and pug play **NO LONGER WORKS**. > > So we have Galio on rework, a pretty decent champ. He's got some AP Ratios, he's got parts of his old kit and overall he's workable for players in PUGs. The problem then arises that Galio turns out to be _really fucking good_ as a tanky initiator. Pro play now picks up Galio and abuses the shit out of him while he's generally "workable" in PUG play. > > Now fast forward months. Galio has been retooled into an AP Battlemage (which failed), then back to an out-and-out tank (which failed) and then back into this weird hybrid of parts until he's no longer an issue in pro play at the cost of his PUG play. But now he's going to get buffed to be pickable/decent in soloqueue which will not help his pro play at all, forever doomed to fly between "PUG stomper" or "Pro-averse". > > Riot, this isn't 2012 anymore. > You can't balance for these two (three if you count high-ELO solo queue) gameplay. > The needs of pros are vastly different than the needs of pugs. > > Pick a side and stick with it. This isn't making anyone happy anymore. PUGs are whining because their favorite champs are changed and chopped apart due to pro play. Pros are whining because they're stuck playing similar champs over and over because Issac Iron in Iron 3 _has_ to be allowed to play Azir because he got a new skin for him. I would prefer pros get catered to but get over this insane desire to make everyone happy. Because right now you're making nobody happy. All of which could easily be fixed if the damage in the game was reduced by a substantial amount making the utility of a single dive (or a single kill) MEAN less in the overall outcome of the game. Right now damage is through the roof, more and more champions are coming out that can 'do it all' and from my perspective has been going on for years. Yasuo was the first outright release champ that had everything. When one kill means possibly two towers, a dragon or baron and most probably the game, it's no wonder that the balance for pro play has taken a huge hit! TLDR: Damage needs to be cut in half or to the point where one 'flashy LC$' play doesn't mean the game is over. Right now it simply is and it is all at the feet of Riot and there speedier games mindset
> [{quoted}](name=K3ars3n,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0014,timestamp=2019-08-22T12:31:47.254+0000) > > All of which could easily be fixed if the damage in the game was reduced by a substantial amount making the utility of a single dive (or a single kill) MEAN less in the overall outcome of the game. > > Right now damage is through the roof, more and more champions are coming out that can 'do it all' and from my perspective has been going on for years. Yasuo was the first outright release champ that had everything. > > When one kill means possibly two towers, a dragon or baron and most probably the game, it's no wonder that the balance for pro play has taken a huge hit! > > TLDR: Damage needs to be cut in half or to the point where one 'flashy LC$' play doesn't mean the game is over. Right now it simply is and it is all at the feet of Riot and there speedier games mindset This is flat-out incorrect and trying to phrase the argument as a different thing. You could reduce the damage in the game by 90% and you'd STILL have this problem because it's not a _numbers_ problem. It's a _design_ problem. If you had actually read the post, you'd see that my points are that the design of champions and characters these days is far more complex and difficult than the older days. Simple number adjustments don't work anymore to sate the needs of pros nor pugs. This means that Riot has to be more drastic. Ever notice how champs like Kalista, Azir, Irelia and Aatrox had huge mechanical changes from losing/gaining passives, changing how they functioned? Ever notice how Ryze, a constant pro-play staple, has had several reworks to try and make him work for both pros and pugs? No, changing the game's damage will not fix anything. If anything it'll only exacerbate the issue because now champions are picked 90% on design and not numbers. Which will further cause issues in pros where macro and micro are valued while PUG play values who has the biggest butterknife or winrate in this nerf world.
: What if someone wants to play kalista or azir but isn't good at the game? Should they be forever doomed to lose the majority of their games simply because LC$ players can have voice comms and can play much better on that champ? Pros make up an incredibly small portion of the playerbase and should not be the metric for balance.
> [{quoted}](name=Bob the Toastr,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000100000002,timestamp=2019-08-22T07:34:03.138+0000) > > What if someone wants to play kalista or azir but isn't good at the game? Should they be forever doomed to lose the majority of their games simply because LC$ players can have voice comms and can play much better on that champ? > > Pros make up an incredibly small portion of the playerbase and should not be the metric for balance. Then they should attempt to improve. As a DOTA example: You wanna play Invoker well? Fine. Go for it. It's gonna be a hard climb but with hard work and diligence, you'll be up there and recognized as a really great Invoker player. This doesn't happen in League except for a select few champs. Most champs end up simplified so that everyone can play them. Azir, for example, had about a quarter of his mechanics removed JUST so he could be better balanced for Pro/PUG play. And it still doesn't work. Don't take away the hard work of others by letting everyone play a champ. Instead, make it so that the few who actually master the champ are sufficiently rewarded while those who aspire to be like them have a climb to take with a pretty big prize waiting at the top.
Wacky9 (NA)
: Just balance separately. Pros are paid to play League at a different level than everyone else, and that should be taken into account. Organized play is completely different from high-elo and people in soloQ should be able to play Shen without feeling useless, just because pros can abuse it.
> [{quoted}](name=Wacky9,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2019-08-22T03:49:18.001+0000) > > Just balance separately. Pros are paid to play League at a different level than everyone else, and that should be taken into account. Organized play is completely different from high-elo and people in soloQ should be able to play Shen without feeling useless, just because pros can abuse it. This _always_ gets brought up and no, it does not work. Part of what drew competitive people to league was the story that "anyone can climb and be the best". Anyone can rise up in the ranks, go pro, etc. Beyond this, let's go with the idea that there are now a pro and a pug LoL: * 1.) Pro games are now nothing like PUGs. This kills advertisement potential because players are using entirely different champions. Seeing a sick play on Azir and being hyped up to play him, only to realize he's totally different from the Pro version you were just watching. * 2.) No pros can stream or practice and likewise, those looking to go pro are now fucked for playing on a "normal" server because the game completely changes. * 3.) You've now doubled the work needed for league. And no, that's not a good thing. You'll have to completely change the game and there's not even a way for players to be aware of buffs/nerfs in the pro scene without patch notes. Not to mention the bugs that have to now be tested between pro/pug versions. In addition, no game does pro/pug balancing different. Not even a game like smash brothers, in which you can modify the champs with options. Everyone plays the exact same unless a player takes it upon themselves to create house rules and modify champions. League would be the first and (quite likely) the last for the dumpster fire this would cause.
Kazekiba (NA)
: You absolutely CAN balance around both sides. Plenty of champs are equally strong in both environments (Pyke, GP before getting nerfed heavily, etc.) However, you cannot *design* around all levels of play equally. Non-damaging ultimates, especially ones that interact with allies more than/in addition to the caster, will guarantee any mediocre champion is absolutely broken in Pro play. Galio's R is basically non-existent now because rather than make it more selfish, they just stripped the team power from it completely; On top of that, they gave an AP juggernaut a dash on a basic ability for no reason; Original Galio had an AoE move steroid like a support Nocturne Q and an ally-castable shield + buff that benefitted Galio regardless of who the target of the shield was. Riot stripped all of that in favor of as much AoE damage as possible, on every single ability, and even moved far away from his MR tank that he -- And now all of Demacia's lore - is based around. *The entire reason Demacia has this persecution of all mages storyline now is because Galio was synonymous with MR* but because Riot can't design for shit, he ended up losing most of that incentive and just building like every other tank.
> [{quoted}](name=Kazekiba,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-08-22T02:20:06.264+0000) > > However, you cannot *design* around all levels of play equally. Which leads to my "This isn't 2012" comment. 2012 champion design and before was _incredibly_ simple. Much less moving parts, much less things to keep track of and overall a much easier game. There will be detractors but I stand by this point. As the game goes on however, there is less and less room for simplistic, basic designs. League is not the only one doing this mind you: Compare DOTA heroes like Monkey King, Arc Warden and Grimstroke to earlier heroes like Sven, Anti-mage and others. If Riot had stopped making ANYTHING at the end of 2012 or around 2013 sure, you could do this. But Riot didn't and with good reason. Which means there will be champs who cannot be viable in PUG without being utterly broken in pro or champions who will be pickable at best in PUG but dogshit in Pro. So now we've come to the crossroads we're at now, which means we need to pick a side and stick with it. Either than or make every champion garen level.
Terozu (NA)
: PUG?
> [{quoted}](name=Terozu,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-08-22T02:07:24.702+0000) > > PUG? Pick Up Games. AKA Solo queue, Normal queue, and most ranked queues sub-D3
: I mean I'd have to argue against catering to the pros as a whole. They should be good enough to make it work and they're getting paid to be there as opposed to the average Joe who plays for fun. If something's overbuffed in pro play and about average viable in solo queue then so be it. I don't have problems with champions like Azir being unplayable in iron because they're difficult to execute on, but chopping Galio out of the game because the pros don't like it should be secondary to player experience.
> [{quoted}](name=AccurateYeet,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=rc3q2V7w,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-22T01:47:46.006+0000) > > I mean I'd have to argue against catering to the pros as a whole. They should be good enough to make it work and they're getting paid to be there as opposed to the average Joe who plays for fun. If something's overbuffed in pro play and about average viable in solo queue then so be it. > > I don't have problems with champions like Azir being unplayable in iron because they're difficult to execute on, but chopping Galio out of the game because the pros don't like it should be secondary to player experience. I prefer pro-tier balance because Pro-tier is how the game should be optimally played: Five incredibly skilled players vs. five incredibly skilled players working as an organized team with a structured gameplan. (Or if you're NA ramming your face into a wall until your nose breaks or the wall gives). I'd also like to see more variety in pro play with several champions being played in high degrees. That said, you're not wrong to have a different opinion than me. If anything, this just proves my point how neither of us get what we want because 50/50 balancing.
Comentários de Rioters
: should i return to league?
Go for it bro. Meta's pretty sick right now. Good players rewarded, bad players are punished accordingly.
NY64 (NA)
: Make Hextech require 3 champions instead of 2
That's fine. Especially considering the hextech 4 buff is useless (2 extra squares, I've NEVER seen it) _and_ the classes that require overlap are insanely broad.
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=lBpb5K09,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-08-21T19:52:46.170+0000) > > Pretty sure NB did have daily missions actually that did give you free stuff mostly tied to the mode with a spattering of emotes, iirc. Basically the same as TFT actually. > > EDIT: It was also said that having "too many missions" made NB boring and burnt people out on the mode yet for some reason it's not happening for TFT. Q u e s t i o n m a r k ? Thats because TFT missions are boring shit that you already naturally do like “use X type unit” or “play 3 games” and not insane bullshit like “Pray that you win one of the 3 events, then pray you get one of the 11~ rewards (battle sled), then slam into enemies, which will likely get you killed, 50 times”, for example. THATS why we got burnt out. If we got rewarded for playing the game or playing X type of champ (marksmen, bruiser, etc) or, fuck, idk, “Win 5 events as a team (total)” Not bullshit like BaTtLe SlEd InTo FiFtY eNeMiEs
> [{quoted}](name=AetherArising,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=lBpb5K09,comment-id=00050002,timestamp=2019-08-21T23:40:30.447+0000) > > Thats because TFT missions are boring shit that you already naturally do like “use X type unit” or “play 3 games” and not insane bullshit like “Pray that you win one of the 3 events, then pray you get one of the 11~ rewards (battle sled), then slam into enemies, which will likely get you killed, 50 times”, for example. > > THATS why we got burnt out. If we got rewarded for playing the game or playing X type of champ (marksmen, bruiser, etc) or, fuck, idk, “Win 5 events as a team (total)” > > Not bullshit like BaTtLe SlEd InTo FiFtY eNeMiEs I don't think we're playing the same missions and I'd like yours. "Use 20 unit or 20 of Unit" (Btw they don't stack). Play 15+ games to 4-5 or later. Place 1st/2nd OR build a hyper specific item. Y'know. Things that are either difficult, time consuming or actively hindering your gameplay. Even so, with these long ass missions, we still see more people. Granted, that _Is_ because TFT offers a different experience and thus attracts a group of people who would never play League unlike NB, which only attracted a small few compared to SR. Which, again, sucks because I liked the mode.
Bazerka (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ywFy01Ku,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2019-08-21T19:51:39.991+0000) > > Where didja work before Riot? I worked for the Minneapolis Public School District :). Shoutout to all my coworkers in MPS!
> [{quoted}](name=Bazerka,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ywFy01Ku,comment-id=000c0000,timestamp=2019-08-21T20:08:41.377+0000) > > I worked for the Minneapolis Public School District :). Shoutout to all my coworkers in MPS! No kidding. I was a substitute teacher before my current job.
: A balanced champion gets buffed
Cycle isn't quite correct: Champion "balanced" in solo queue but busted in pro play. Champion will receive a nerf that makes them gone in pro play but killed in solo queue. Community rages about "DUH LC$" Riot caves, buffs champ in another category. Champ is now either busted in pro play or total dogshit while "pickable at best" in solo queue. Repeat endlessly as Riot swings wildly between yolo queue for bad players and the best players in the world. TL;DR pick pro or pugs and leave it at that.
Juice (EUNE)
: There are so many champs that make me feel like I'm playing on Nightmare difficulty
Nope, save for two guys: {{champion:64}} {{champion:81}} Very strange how some of the oldest champs are also some of the most _truly_ problematic.
: Imagine if Dominion/TT/Rotating Modes/Nexus Blitz had daily missions that give you free stuff...
Pretty sure NB did have daily missions actually that did give you free stuff mostly tied to the mode with a spattering of emotes, iirc. Basically the same as TFT actually. EDIT: It was also said that having "too many missions" made NB boring and burnt people out on the mode yet for some reason it's not happening for TFT. Q u e s t i o n m a r k ?
Bazerka (NA)
: Lunch break w/ Baz
Where didja work before Riot?
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EE3HkQBJ,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-08-20T18:24:42.192+0000) > > Mostly because Cait's headshot is just an additional bonus damage buff, unlike Jhin (Who gets an absolutely massive crit + MS), Annie (Who gets a stun) and Pantheon (who gets EVERYTHING empowered). By that logic, they should remove Vayne's W since it's just an additional damage buff and therefore doesn't need the visual indicator.
> [{quoted}](name=Freeza with an I,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EE3HkQBJ,comment-id=00080001,timestamp=2019-08-21T06:45:25.546+0000) > > By that logic, they should remove Vayne's W since it's just an additional damage buff and therefore doesn't need the visual indicator. The thing is when Cait has a headshot ready, you see it in her particles on her hand. Same deal with Vayne. Jhin/Annie have much bigger effects than Cait and Vayne so they naturally have more visible indicators. Jhin primarily has it because you always need to be aware of how many shots he has lest you get 1-2'd by a surprise nukeshot you didn't see coming and Annie because stuns.
: Why doesn't Caitlyn have a Headshot counter under her HP?
Mostly because Cait's headshot is just an additional bonus damage buff, unlike Jhin (Who gets an absolutely massive crit + MS), Annie (Who gets a stun) and Pantheon (who gets EVERYTHING empowered).
: Has anyone noticed how deathly quiet Riot has been since they announced Eternals?
Hopefully Bazerka gets some kinda Rioter award for being here and just tanking this aggro.
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=EYPxRHgo,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2019-08-18T17:56:42.138+0000) > > They're affected, but it's rarely enough to completely swing a fight unless A.) You've got one hyper stacked hypercarry or B.) you're way far behind and items are the crutch keeping you up. And yeah, prior to hextech. Now with hextech they often last 25-30 seconds, almost double what it was. Fact is that hextech rarely affects the game in a meaningful way beyond disabling the one rare hyper-carry-comp someone is running. Most people either dip a _little_ into hextech (Mostly Vi and Jinx) or they don't bother going out of their way to build it at all. > > It's a neat trait. It's somewhat useful but it's hardly unhealthy nor utterly game warping. It's decent at best. Hextech is active for 80% of most fights, as at later levels when they've gotten the full bonus it covers the extra duration of the fight. It's a trait that almost completely removes half of the strategy in the game, as it's not just about the RNG of getting champions or picking the right traits to run, but also using what items you get to make up for the weaknesses in your team and strategy. Hextech just says "screw you" to any item-reliant traits, which are the majority.
> [{quoted}](name=Glasletter,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=EYPxRHgo,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-19T03:11:19.996+0000) > > Hextech is active for 80% of most fights, as at later levels when they've gotten the full bonus it covers the extra duration of the fight. It's a trait that almost completely removes half of the strategy in the game, as it's not just about the RNG of getting champions or picking the right traits to run, but also using what items you get to make up for the weaknesses in your team and strategy. > > Hextech just says "screw you" to any item-reliant traits, which are the majority. ...Yeah, no. At best, it's like 20-30% of the fight. Especially late game. And NOBODY is running full hextech. Are you insane? Nobles is a comp that's good enough to run despite having only one synergy in the comp (Knight 1, which is meh by the time you get Kayle). Blademaster is good enough to run despite a lack of synergy. Etc. Hextech is nowhere close to as good as those for the weird hodgepodge of champions you have to run. Hextech also _adds_ strategy to the game because it forces you to vary up comp and modify how you put items on your champs rather than "unga me big brain me give draven 6 items den make corner comp ME HUGE BRAEN". Already I've seen people varying up strategy and comps more to deal with hextech. Could the hextech synergy be better/different? Maybe. But this idea isn't nearly as bad for the game that people are making it out to be.
: > [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QcoZH9ka,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-08-18T18:05:46.779+0000) > > Oh no, they're interested in it but you have to remember the pro-centric balance approach DOTA has vs. League. > > Several heroes in DOTA have sub-45% win rates. Some heroes such as Pudge sport over 50% winrates with well above 10% pick rate (Hell Pudge has over 40% pick rate). This all links back to how DOTA is balanced for Pros and how the game is designed to cater to the best of the best. Now, pray tell, how would people respond to you if you said "You know we should focus on pro-centric balance and we should get good" or that "Yasuo has a 40% pick rate and a 52% win rate, that's fine." > > Yeah, you'd be screamed at. > > The fact is (positively for some, unfortunately for my opinion) Riot caters greatly to lower-tier players. Despite all the "CATERING TO THE LC$" memes, Riot does go out of their way to help lower ELOs. I earnestly believe if Riot said fuck it, hunker down and strictly cater to the pro scene there could definitely be more champions played and it has been going up in years thanks to better balance changes. However, until they're truly ready to help the pro scene as needed, we're always going to see champs being scrub choices because "we can't have Jimmy John in Bronze 4 upset that he can't play Azir". This just gave me a mental image of the community screaming at Icefrog to buff IO because of low pub winrate. Pretty funny to contemplate.
> [{quoted}](name=Bad Footwear,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QcoZH9ka,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2019-08-18T18:49:01.177+0000) > > This just gave me a mental image of the community screaming at Icefrog to buff IO because of low pub winrate. Pretty funny to contemplate. Anyone else tired of Pudge? Like it can't JUST be me. 52% winrate, OVER 40% PICK RATE. Honestly this hero is dumb. It's a shame Icefrog only cares about making profits and The International Battle Pa$$. :\
Exibir mais

CaptainMårvelous

Nível 194 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão