: > give him something else for compensation imho. I think him getting non-stop buffs while being a permanent high/top-tier pick for 2 years straight is good enough compensation already
"High/top-tier pick for 2 years straight" - there have been several points where he had sub-50% winrate....
Charmy Bird (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=Mm3ZF7LB,comment-id=00050001,timestamp=2019-11-04T19:00:33.868+0000) > > Its because riots backend is a decade old. Its easier to implement from the ground up than to retroactively rework everything to use it. They had to do a *lot* of work to get it to this point, and because they were also makIng a single client for all their just announced games, it had to wait anyway to not do three times the work. Not an excuse imo. Riot could have done this years ago but they had other priorities.
Ah the 'its so easy they're just lazy' excuse. Please, my friend, go design your own advanced client to handle matchmaking using an old, dated codebase that has to handle tens of millions of players and add 2fa to it seemlessly. Let me know how long it takes you. ;)
: well, considering even kleptomancy accelerates snowballing by giving up to 120 gold at a time... and most of the primary runes do deal with damage (seriously, remember aftershock, you know, that rune that can add up to was it 150 in each defensive stat while also dealing damage? )
Yes, that's my point. They have that SO that tanks can serve their purpose and function in lane. If every tank rune was PURELY defensive, no tank would ever get out of lane in a stable position unless they were against a tank. Those bits of damage that tanks do are necessary for them to serve their purpose. The problem with damage is not Maokai, Shen, or Sion damage... the problem with damage is assassins and adcs, realistically.
: I hard agree, I say D3+ should have it since D4 is full of boosted players and its population is high enough. But back to the main point, I'm certain most high elo players would agree to wait an extra 5-10 minutes to have a quality game rather than having a teammate auto filled into their worst role and just ruin the game. It's not the auto filled players fault, it's more of the system letting them down.
Riot has stated in the past that without auto-fill, popular role queues could be well over an hour, and that outside of the lowest popularity roles, most roles would see 45+ minute queues. Now, this was a while ago so may not be ENTIRELY accurate anymore, but I doubt the case has changed that much. So it's not 'an extra 5-10 minutes', its not even 'an extra 20 minutes', it's an extra 45 minutes. An extra hour. If you're mid, possibly even an extra 2 hours. (And bear in mind that when the queue times get that long the possibility someone has forgotten about it and walked away rises, meaning you'll get more failed queues as well) Still worth it? I didn't vote on the poll because I'm not in the affected range so I have no opinion myself. But it's important to make sure everyone knows exactly what the trade is. lol
Whiisp (NA)
: As much as Auto fill is a good concept on paper, it ruins too many games [Diamond 2+ (Diamond+)]
Would you rather wait over an hour for a game EVERY game playing any role other than support?
Syrile (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5yWsqY23,comment-id=0004000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T05:15:31.696+0000) > > Regardless of your perspective on it... directing insults - deserved or otherwise, factual or otherwise - towards someone you're trying to get to do something is not productive. Literally nothing I said was an insult? So... that makes no sense whatsoever. I stated the actual truth. Bot lane is hated by almost everyone who is not there to cheese it. Tons of ADCs quit or hate the game because of the changes and this is making them worse. These are facts and nothing I said was an insult.
The truth can be an insult. If you call a fat person fat its still an insult, even if it is accurate. Or are you so insensitive that you are incapable of restraining yourself from telling people every negative thought you have because 'its the truth'?
: There are two problems. 1st, runes. All runes pretty much add damage. Even defensive runes are something like "prevent some damage and deal some damage" like Grasp. We should have pure defensive runes too. 2nd, defensive items suck. Items like Dead man's plate and Sunfire have been nerfed to oblivion. Everyone buys stuff like stopwatch instead, because stasis helps much more than overpriced tank stats. I don't see anyone building e.g. Randuins anymore, because the cost-effectiveness is just crap. Pretty much all defensive items should have their stats increased by 10-20%.
Your first point is pure bs. A shen doing 2% more damage is not a problem. Tank runes having some damage component is not at all part of the problem. The problems are simple: Certain sources of burst are too high, some damage items(mostly duskblade) do too much too well, and then your second point - a lot of defensive items do too little. But unless ALL options were pure defense or the pure defense options were so insanely strong they were just broken.... then nobody would take the pure defense options. Why? Because a tank still needs to pose SOME threat or else there's no reason to ever do damage to them. If your Maokai does 1 damage per hit, then people will just let him get to the dps and not care. Because they can ignore him. And... he'll be unable to do ANYTHING in lane because he can't wave clear without damage and he can't trade... so he'll get no farm, no items, etc. Tank runes have damage so they can function in lane, and so that they offer some threat in fights. That's perfectly healthy. And it's how it should be.
: Can we tone down damage and make league require skill again?
I don't disagree with the premise - damage, particularly in the sense of champs designed to one-shot(and predominately incited by Lethality/Duskblade), is a bit on the high side with defensive options not quite living up to it.... but your argument is weakened significantly by the part where you claimed the game no longer requires skill. I wish people wouldn't try to use hyperbole to make their points... because it just makes it all the less likely anyone in a position of authority will care what they have to say. The game still requires skill, the skill is just expressed in different ways. You may not value the skills that are required by the game currently, and that's okay, but they're still skills. You can express your opinion about the game without the hyperbole, I assure you. And your argument will be all the stronger for it.
Meddler (NA)
: Not too heavily. Alcoves have meaningful impact some games, but haven't shown that they'll heavily disrupt laning (nor are they intended to). The elemental transformations do impact the vision game somewhat, given they happen around halfway through the game and only affect some parts of the map they so far don't look like they'll push champions in or out of support viability.
Thank you for the answer! I sincerely hope that ends up being the case in the live game.... because blitz/thresh/pyke are already borderline too strong, and I can't imagine this being anything but a huge buff to all three lol
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: October 25
In your internal tests, how have you seen the terrain changes impact the support champion pool, and the overall availability of vision?
Syrile (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5yWsqY23,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-10-18T13:48:50.555+0000) > > This is not about flaming Riot, please keep THAT out of the thread. Insulting the people who have the power to actually make the changes we're talking about is a not an effective way to encourage them to listen. > > But I agree with the core of your post - bot lane is going to be super hard to play enchanters/mages because of the huge buff this gives to champs whose primary success path is to control the bushes. These rift changes are a buff to the three champions who are already basically the strongest currently: Pyke, Blitz, Thresh. That is hardly flaming them. That is stating the truth. It is actually evident in the changes made in the last couple of years that they wish to decrease strategy and tactics in the game. A professional team actually said it was closer to Tekken than old League of Legends.
Regardless of your perspective on it... directing insults - deserved or otherwise, factual or otherwise - towards someone you're trying to get to do something is not productive.
Rilea (EUW)
: Will the dragon spawn order be displayed in champ select? It's been discussed before, but with such dynamic changes to dragon, I think it's more essential than ever
At least the type of elemental rift we'll be getting should be shown, IMO.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: October 18
With regards to high level concepts going in to pre-season... what was your reasoning for not doing anything to increase vision alongside these changes that will significantly increase the number of blind corners, bushes, and dark spots on the map... while also reducing any options for dual-vision items? Personally, I'm very concerned about how much stronger this is going to make hook champs, when they're already on the strong side of balanced... and how hard it is going to make playing enchanters in bot lane and I'd be curious to know your thoughts.
: Fiddlesticks point-and-click fear is good and deserves to stay, here's why:
Fiddlesticks fear is bad because its duration is about 3 times too long.
Syrile (NA)
: Warding in bot lane will be nearly impossible with 3 bushes and an alcove. It will be a nightmare to deal with any JG that knows how to play and the already atrocious state of bot lane will just get worse and worse. Riot hates strategy and tactics though... So may as well make it even more like Call of Duty rather than a MOBA.
This is not about flaming Riot, please keep THAT out of the thread. Insulting the people who have the power to actually make the changes we're talking about is a not an effective way to encourage them to listen. But I agree with the core of your post - bot lane is going to be super hard to play enchanters/mages because of the huge buff this gives to champs whose primary success path is to control the bushes. These rift changes are a buff to the three champions who are already basically the strongest currently: Pyke, Blitz, Thresh.
HeeroTX (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9AR9s1lA,comment-id=000f0002000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-17T14:27:44.763+0000) > > Here's another quote from you: "I would say the MAJORITY would probably have argued that League was "better than ever" each year through at least season 5" The point I was trying to make is that League has not ALWAYS been "worst ever", and one can argue that the MAJORITY would not have called League "worst ever" through at least season 5 because for each season from 1 to 5 League was provably GROWING often by massive numbers. Meaning even if ALL the existing players thought the game had gone bad, all the new players possibly outweighed them. It is possible that that trend completely reversed around season 6 or 7 but we have no hard numbers to prove one way or another because Riot stopped releasing player counts. >"At a "high" level (ie. beyond my own selfish interests) I think there is argument that this is the worst season ever (the next lowest in a steady decline) but that's more to hating the direction they're taking things rather than "X specific changes suck"." - both of which indicate you feel a majority agree with your personal perspective. But that's neither here nor there. My "at a high level" meant just saying from a view that is not "I want ADC to be best role", that was not intended to imply "in the view of a majority of people". And saying "there is an argument" neither implies not states that the majority hold that view. The whole reason I said that was that I, **MYSELF** even said that season 9 is NOT the "worst ever" because I personally found season 8 to be much worse. > To get on topic... the only way your 'majority' argument with the 10 directions works is if you assume the ten directions have literally 0 similarities. Because otherwise 9 groups won't be unhappy, only a few will be genuinely unhappy. Others will be varying degrees between neutral and positive. Have you been watching BREXIT at all? The whole reason that thing hasn't moved in 2 YEARS is because two sides that are of completely opposite opinions keep tor%%%%ing the thing because they EACH hate different parts of any proposed deal. Remai%%%% hate the deal because they don't want to leave at all and leavers hate the deal because it doesn't go far enough. US politics are the same way. We don't enact X policy because the Republicans don't think it's conservative enough and Democrats don't think it's liberal enough. Same with league. URF players want bursty games that end in 5 mins and "old-school" (for lack of better term) players want games that go to 45+. (that's a gross simplification, but the post is long enough already) If you give them a 20 min game most are going to be angry because no one really LIKES compromise. > As to your consensus arguments... a game developer should always make the game THEY want to play. Full stop. The players then decide whether that is a game THEY want to play, but they don't get to decide what the developers make. Player insights can provide guidance to devs when they're trying to decide between multiple directions they're equally preferential towards... but its always up to the devs to decide the direction. I worked in the game dev industry, and like pretty much any artistic industry, I hate to burst your bubble but devs don't choose squat. And "want to play" is only the realm of hobbyists. Devs (and actors, and singers, etc) make the game (art) that someone PAYS THEM to make, period, full stop. The only way you make the game YOU want to play is if you're self-funded. Now, companies can make any number of BAD decisions that they want (Blizzard has clearly been a market leader in this area). If you want to make MONEY (ie. earn a living as a developer) then you make a game that PLAYERS want to play and more specifically PAY for, which is why champs get buffed right before skin releases. (Now, an exception to this is if LCS/eSports sponsors and viewers pay sufficient income that Riot doesn't even NEED any players at all, then player opinion is moot, any profit there is just bonus. That MAY be true now, I doubt it, but it's possible. The NFL doesn't care how many footballs the average consumer buys because they make their money on beer ads and stadium seats)
Put simply: Most players aren't extremes. Most players fall somewhere in the middle. So the EXTREMES are the ones who are either super upset or super happy, and there's no grey area. But the MAJORITY - the people who just play the game and don't post often - fall somewhere in the middle and are shades of happy. There's a bit of a difference between Brexit and US politics compared to LoL. That being the level of impact it has on peoples lives... so ya, people have extreme opinions. Especially in US politics because in US politics there ACTUALLY are only two options. So you're generally either the 'winner' or the 'loser' and there's no grey area. You can pretend to burst my bubble all you like, but a smart publisher knows that a game designed 'to try to please people' tends to fail. You look at games that have really had a big impact and you get things like God of War, Persona 5, or Breath of the Wild, things like WoW and even early days League of Legends, things like Journey... these are all games designed by a developer with a very clear vision of what they wanted to create... and they turned out well. Then you look at things like Rift which had a developer who tried way too hard to please people... and you get disasters. Of course there are exceptions... but... A game made with a clear vision by a developer that is making the game they want to make is one that resonates. A game made just to 'please people' tends to feel hollow, and people DON'T tend to love it. You can try to claim otherwise, but if you REALLY take a look at the games that are successful, they're generally the ones with publishers who are willing to let the devs hold the reins on the actual development direction.
: Finally someone who can explain it in a normal fking way In my country we dont use AM or PM or any of the BST PDT CEST it does nothing but cause confusion. 21:00 is at least something all people fking know.
You say that, but in some countries the 24 hour clock is only used in hospitals and military facilities, so people will say the exact opposite '2100 what does that even mean?' And to them 24 hour clock does nothing but cause confusion. Different countries are different.
: Starting with removing {{item:3147}}... (Or add a counterpart that creates vision.. ah wait.. there was, but we remove those...)
I don't get why that item has the ward passive... it makes zero sense to me. It's a strong enough item without that.
Palaven (NA)
: Designers Fail To Understand The Top Lane Problem
The other half of the solution was the Rift Herald change... by having the possibility of two rift heralds if you get early priority, there's more incentive for junglers to control top lane and for mid laners to roam that direction. Not sure if it's going to work, but you did seem to miss that component.
Subdue (NA)
: Actually I think it being too dark is a result of player behavior rather than game mechanics. I realized this by watching worlds. As it is, they have SO MANY WARDS everywhere. SO MANY. So it's not a lack of availability of wards, but rather, players not knowing how to use them.
You're half right. Players definitely don't use their wards as much as they should. But even in pro, the map is super dark overall if you turn off the fog view... they just know where they're going to play so they spend their vision there, and they can control that small area completely. There's still a max of about 10 wards at any given time realistically counting pinks. Which, with the number of extra vision holes they're adding, simply won't be sufficient to keep any reasonable control on the map.
Comentários de Rioters
: It doesn't have scaling. It's Dragon Soul not Elemental Buff.
Yes, but if it's 2% cooldown reduction then it's a pathetic, useless ability that really won't make a difference. If it's 100% cooldown reduction then it's a billion times worse than Shojin. Since we don't know the numbers, its really impossible for us to say if its actually a problem or not.
HeeroTX (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9AR9s1lA,comment-id=000f00020000,timestamp=2019-10-17T13:55:16.464+0000) > > You're also notably overestimating how many people share your individual perspective(which is an arrogance I often see online - people like to assume the majority always agree with them because it makes them feel better). > Here is a quote from ME in the post you're replying to: "**Many would probably disagree with my opinion** based on the fact that I prefer longer, slower games and Riot has been steadily moving away from that" I'm under ZERO delusions that the majority of people hold my opinion about what league should be. I've never liked URF and yet that mode is/was extremely popular. That said, it's very easy to point out that the majority are most likely on my "side" albeit for different REASONS. Afterall, if League could go in 10 different directions, then 9 groups of people are ALWAYS going to be unhappy. Thus, the people who got their way will almost always be in the minority unless the selected path is obscenely popular. THIS is why you ALWAYS will see complaints about champion buffs/nerfs. because SOMEONE is going to hate the change no matter what. With the huge range of champions, THAT is unavoidable, but the overall direction of the game itself is something that Riot SHOULD be able to better manage into something more like consensus. EDIT: And for the record, I would HOPE that the return of URF itself would mean a future change in direction for Summoners Rift. I fully understand that a LARGE number of players do not share my fondness for longer games. That said, what Riot should have always been trying to do is build two co-existing game modes, one for fast play (URF or Nexus Blitz or something else) and one keeping to League's original "slower" style of play (Summoners Rift). The problem is the desires of the players wanting each of those things are diametrically opposed, and you have to know that you're essentially, at best, alienating one group by trying to make only one game; at worst you're going to leave everyone unhappy since no one gets what they really want.
Here's another quote from you: "I would say the MAJORITY would probably have argued that League was "better than ever" each year through at least season 5" and another "At a "high" level (ie. beyond my own selfish interests) I think there is argument that this is the worst season ever (the next lowest in a steady decline) but that's more to hating the direction they're taking things rather than "X specific changes suck"." - both of which indicate you feel a majority agree with your personal perspective. But that's neither here nor there. To get on topic... the only way your 'majority' argument with the 10 directions works is if you assume the ten directions have literally 0 similarities. Because otherwise 9 groups won't be unhappy, only a few will be genuinely unhappy. Others will be varying degrees between neutral and positive. To use a circle as a representation of the preferences, 3 would be completely unhappy(those on the absolute opposite side), 4 will be generally okay with it but not completely like it(the people on the left and right sides), two will be mostly happy(those to the immediate left and right of the current direction), and one will be completely happy. But even that's an oversimplification of the reality. There's so much nuance that it's hard to make any hard statements. As to your consensus arguments... a game developer should always make the game THEY want to play. Full stop. The players then decide whether that is a game THEY want to play, but they don't get to decide what the developers make. Player insights can provide guidance to devs when they're trying to decide between multiple directions they're equally preferential towards... but its always up to the devs to decide the direction.
: WHICH ARE ALL LEAGUE OF LEGENDS. They are just League of Legends on a different module. I think you're mistaking Summoner's Rift for League of Legends. Summoner's Rift is a MODULE.
No, many of them still take place in Runeterra, but they're not League of Legends.
HeeroTX (NA)
: To be fair, as long as the game continues to exist it is entirely POSSIBLE (if admittedly UNLIKELY) that each new season IS the "worst season ever", because you set a new low standard. Just like it is POSSIBLE for runners to set a new world record every year, it is possible for League to get worse and worse. I personally think 9 was at least better than 8, but that's really not saying much, because as an ADC main, "ADC 2018" was a thing and really makes that season tough to battle. At a "high" level (ie. beyond my own selfish interests) I think there is argument that this is the worst season ever (the next lowest in a steady decline) but that's more to hating the direction they're taking things rather than "X specific changes suck". Many would probably disagree with my opinion based on the fact that I prefer longer, slower games and Riot has been steadily moving away from that. And to argue your point, I would say the MAJORITY would probably have argued that League was "better than ever" each year through at least season 5, maybe through season 6, which coincidentally is around the last time we got hard numbers on playerbase.
Here's the thing: It is GUARANTEED to be the 'worst season ever'.... to some people. It is ALSO guaranteed to be the BEST season ever to some people. League has millions and millions of players. Which means it has millions of different perspectives on 'best vs worst' season. If you don't like the current season, you're not wrong... an opinion can't be wrong. But the people whose opinion is diametrically opposed to yours are ALSO not wrong. There is no factual 'better' or 'worse' from an objective perspective. It's all about whether you like the current direction. And I think you're VASTLY underestimating the number of complaints the game saw back in s2-5 on the forums. The forums have ALWAYS been full of 'OMG WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO MY GAME?' You're also notably overestimating how many people share your individual perspective(which is an arrogance I often see online - people like to assume the majority always agree with them because it makes them feel better). The reality is that the people who hate what is coming, or who are currently unsatisfied, will always be louder than the people who love it... so the forums will always seem like the sky is falling. And, again, this is not exclusive to League. This is true in nearly every online game. Hell, there are even some doomsayers in FFXIV and FFXIV's current expansion is the highest rated game of this year so far, critically speaking.
me op mid (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7gpLzupI,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-10-16T00:28:26.183+0000) > > They primarily focus changes on pro about 2 patches a year, in time for worlds/msi. > > The rest of the time, they follow the BALANCE FRAMEWORK which covers all areas of play including average players, high-tier players, top-tier players, and pro. Yes ofc they follow the "balance framework", thats why Zoe, Sylas, Akali rework and neeko exist. You must be very low elo if you think they balance the game. Ask every streamer/master+ player, but literally every one of them, they will tell you that this game is not even closed to be balanced and no one is really trying to balance it. Why do u think champions that were perma banned in season 1-4 are not banned now? bcs they balanced them. Why do u think some champs are pick or ban for the goddamn whole season 9? bcs no one is balancing right now.
> [{quoted}](name=me op mid,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7gpLzupI,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-10-16T10:30:04.272+0000) > > Yes ofc they follow the "balance framework", thats why Zoe, Sylas, Akali rework and neeko exist. > You must be very low elo if you think they balance the game. Ask every streamer/master+ player, but literally every one of them, they will tell you that this game is not even closed to be balanced and no one is really trying to balance it. > Why do u think champions that were perma banned in season 1-4 are not banned now? bcs they balanced them. Why do u think some champs are pick or ban for the goddamn whole season 9? bcs no one is balancing right now. 95% of champions are between 48 and 52% winrate at most levels of play. That sounds pretty balanced to me.
: Unpopular opinion but it needs to be heard
I don't want to be the one to break this to you, but I think I have to be.... People have been saying 'this is the worst season ever' since League of Legends launched. Every single season has been 'the worst season ever' to a segment of people. And, no matter what Riot does, every season will be 'the worst season ever' to a segment of people. And, most likely, that segment will be extremely vocal, making it seem like everything is always getting worse. This has been a reality in EVERY ONLINE GAME EVER. Heroes of the Storm, back when anyone cared about it, had naysayers saying 'this is the worst its ever been'. Every D3 patch is 'the worst patch ever'. Every DotA 2 patch is 'the worst patch ever'. Every CoD is 'the worst CoD ever'. Every Fortnite season is 'the worst season ever'. This is just how people are online. Every WoW expansion was 'the worst WoW expansion' to some people when they were playing it - even Burning Crusade and Wrath(which are often seen as WoW's golden age nowadays), when they were fresh, had some people who hated them. Burning Crusade was extremely heavily criticized for destroying guilds, while Wrath had its critics both over 'making things too easy' and 'making things too hard'. You're never going to escape 'the worst the game has ever been' as long as you play games. Sorry.
: Uberdanger has a very good point
They primarily focus changes on pro about 2 patches a year, in time for worlds/msi. The rest of the time, they follow the BALANCE FRAMEWORK which covers all areas of play including average players, high-tier players, top-tier players, and pro.
Swimmx (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=72Nt3U2R,comment-id=001a,timestamp=2019-10-09T16:07:58.302+0000) > > It doesn't matter what political statement they made, if the world champions tried to use Riot's platform to make a political message, they'd be heavily penalized for it. > > When you're invited onto a large business's public press platform, you don't use it to amplify your own political message. > > While I support the message the HS dude made, he chose a REALLY stupid way to get the message out and ABSOLUTELY deserved what happened to him. What about the announcers?
> [{quoted}](name=Swimmx,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=72Nt3U2R,comment-id=001a0000,timestamp=2019-10-09T16:22:51.661+0000) > > What about the announcers? The fact that they hid behind the desk BEFORE he said it gave a very clear signal they knew something was coming. Which meant Blizzard couldn't trust them. Since they weren't employees, it made the most business sense to simply no longer be involved with them.
Swimmx (NA)
: What if the LOL world Champions this year speak out in support of Hong Kong.
It doesn't matter what political statement they made, if the world champions tried to use Riot's platform to make a political message, they'd be heavily penalized for it. When you're invited onto a large business's public press platform, you don't use it to amplify your own political message. While I support the message the HS dude made, he chose a REALLY stupid way to get the message out and ABSOLUTELY deserved what happened to him.
Jøkèr (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=p9Ao0FH9,comment-id=0007000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-06T03:21:50.855+0000) > > No, I'm saying your approach to the game is the reason you dislike promos, not any inherent problem with promos themselves. You're creating stress for yourself, and you could easily avoid that but you choose not to. As a result, every game is stressful and promos are way more stressful still. > > And I'm pretty sure Riot stated recently that ranked has been the most popular queue for a long time... but I can't cite it, so I won't say it as fact. What the are you talking about? Despite the myriad of stupid (but funny) shit that happens in either ranked or normal games, I'm not really stressed about LoL at all. I simply find that promos is tedious.
How could they be any more or less tedious than any other game? They're just games like any other.
Jøkèr (NA)
: So what you are saying is that I should go through tedious bullshit (in terms of promos) just to get a sense of value from promoting, than just climbing the rank. I like a good challenge but playing this game is annoying enough. Why have the extra layer? If Riot removed promo games, it's not like everyone will start winning. You are still gonna be matched with 9 other variables that determine the outcome of each game. Believe me, I think losing 3-5 games in one sitting is 'lose enough.' Any more and it would be demoralizing. There are probably more players that play normals than ranked games. If this idea was implemented, we could see more players opting to ranked games. The whole idea of promos was to give a tournament style way to rank up. But there is no tournament. For the most part, there is no meeting with four other individuals and training and fighting against another team that does the same. We are literally in a matchmaking queue that put in 10 random players who's skill levels vary (including smurfs). I believe that there is still meaning into ranking if you wanted to with or without promos. Everyone started somewhere and they usually want to see how far they can reach to the top.
No, I'm saying your approach to the game is the reason you dislike promos, not any inherent problem with promos themselves. You're creating stress for yourself, and you could easily avoid that but you choose not to. As a result, every game is stressful and promos are way more stressful still. And I'm pretty sure Riot stated recently that ranked has been the most popular queue for a long time... but I can't cite it, so I won't say it as fact.
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=f4jA20aA,comment-id=00190001,timestamp=2019-09-20T21:03:59.429+0000) > > I love how people thumbsed down this without replying. lol > > Come on, don't chicken out. The OP didn't chicken out, the rest of you who downvoted should do the same - try to provide your set of checks and balances. > > If you can't do it, then stop complaining about how easy it must be. > > Followup note: I am not trying to claim Riot is doing a good job. Nor am I going to say they're not. I'm just saying... if you all think its so easy... do it up. Tell me what you want it to check for. Because I'm sure if you ACTUALLY have an answer, and one that fits the important criteria... we can probably pitch it to Riot - and other MOBA developers - for a good chunk of change. Every MOBA dev would love to find the magic formula. 1: Zero false positives isn't a goal that can be achieved even in the IRL justice system, so that doesn't sound like a good reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If there is a false positive, that sounds like something that would generate a support ticket (and so human review) in the vast majority of cases. 2: Item purchases are important. Nobody does mass item sell-offs to purchase six of the same item for a legitimate reason. This is low-hanging fruit that can be easily picked. Shit like the image described in the OP shouldn't be possible. 3: Nah. There's no reason borderline cases can't be surfaced for a human (either riot, or a volunteer) to look at. I still maintain that if freaking CSGO can have Overwatch, we can have Tribunal in a form that fixes the problems of the old one. The presence of stuff like the image in the OP shows me that their fancy machine learning system has some blind spots so big a truck could drive through them.
> [{quoted}](name=Karunamon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=f4jA20aA,comment-id=001900010000,timestamp=2019-09-21T04:02:34.309+0000) > > 1: Zero false positives isn't a goal that can be achieved even in the IRL justice system, so that doesn't sound like a good reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If there is a false positive, that sounds like something that would generate a support ticket (and so human review) in the vast majority of cases. > > 2: Item purchases are important. Nobody does mass item sell-offs to purchase six of the same item for a legitimate reason. This is low-hanging fruit that can be easily picked. Shit like the image described in the OP shouldn't be possible. > > 3: Nah. There's no reason borderline cases can't be surfaced for a human (either riot, or a volunteer) to look at. I still maintain that if freaking CSGO can have Overwatch, we can have Tribunal in a form that fixes the problems of the old one. The presence of stuff like the image in the OP shows me that their fancy machine learning system has some blind spots so big a truck could drive through them. The problem with false positives in a situation like LoL is that false positives are lost customers. People are far less likely to appeal a ban in a game than a criminal mistrial... since the former has a much smaller life impact. CSGO's playerbase is roughly 1/100th the size of LoL. That makes something like a tribunal much easier. Their max concurrents EVER was less than a million(their average is closer to around 300 thousand). It's completely reasonable for a manual review system to manage reports for a playerbase that size. Less so when you're dealing with a playerbase estimated to be around 100 million active players, with estimates of around 30 million daily players. I've seen a lot of people who die as we're pushing the nexus(in games where we go 5 for 1 and have a full free minute to take down nothing but the nexus) sell their items and buy all tears(before they made them unique) or stuff like that. People also do it a lot when they know there's no way they'll respawn in time to protect anything. Should people who do that automatically be punished? Seems harsh. I mean, it's not something I'd personally ever do, but *shrugs* it's fine as long as you're not going to respawn before the game ends anyways. Doesn't hurt anyone. Hell, in one game I played, our Zed who was like... 10/0 before our last push, got a penta during the final fight but died to the nexus tower as it happened. The remaining four of us were still alive, he sold everything and bought all amp tomes. He HARD carried that game, was pretty nice during the game, didn't treat anyone poorly... yet your system would punish him for it? Okay. Also... 'six daggers' is actually a feasible item path for some characters early game. So you can't just do 'six of one item gets you banned'. Sorry, not that simple. Try again. :)
Jøkèr (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=p9Ao0FH9,comment-id=000700000001,timestamp=2019-09-20T20:59:24.041+0000) > > Demotion protection is definitely a thing. After you get promoted, you have a grace period where you can't be demoted. > > If they get rid of promotion matches, they'd have to get rid of that as well. That's fine. If a player usually risks losing LP just to gain LP, I dont see why we should make the transition of promoting tedious. Lose enough games and you will demote. Same is with other certain competitive games.
But it wouldn't be 'lose enough' it'd be 'lose one'. You'd literally promote, then demote on your next loss. Seems like it'd make that first game after you promote needlessly stressful... and it'd probably take any sense of meaning out of promoting entirely. It always amuses me how unhealthy most peoples' approach to this game is... they treat EVERY game like it's a tournament or a promotion series, which means every game is extremely stressful, and thus there's no room to get 'more serious', so if any added pressure gets added on, it breaks them. Learn from G2. They try to play their best every game, but they still joke around, have fun, and take some levity into the situation. However.... when it comes to an important game, all bets are off and they go srs mode. That's how it should be. Your normal ranked games should be FUN. You should still play your best, but you should be enjoying it, win or lose. Then when you get to a series, you go srs bsns mode and pull out all the stops. And if you lose, well, that leaves you more motivated to do it next time.
: Alright, I'll bite. How would **you** design the system, given the following criteria: 1) Your system can have no false positives at all. 2) Your system has to be looking at behaviour patterns, not item purchases. 3) Your system has to be completely automatic. Given that, what would you have it look for? If a high school student can do it... surely you can, right?
> [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=f4jA20aA,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2019-09-19T19:14:41.764+0000) > > Alright, I'll bite. How would **you** design the system, given the following criteria: > > 1) Your system can have no false positives at all. > 2) Your system has to be looking at behaviour patterns, not item purchases. > 3) Your system has to be completely automatic. > > Given that, what would you have it look for? > > If a high school student can do it... surely you can, right? I love how people thumbsed down this without replying. lol Come on, don't chicken out. The OP didn't chicken out, the rest of you who downvoted should do the same - try to provide your set of checks and balances. If you can't do it, then stop complaining about how easy it must be. Followup note: I am not trying to claim Riot is doing a good job. Nor am I going to say they're not. I'm just saying... if you all think its so easy... do it up. Tell me what you want it to check for. Because I'm sure if you ACTUALLY have an answer, and one that fits the important criteria... we can probably pitch it to Riot - and other MOBA developers - for a good chunk of change. Every MOBA dev would love to find the magic formula.
: > [{quoted}](name=Grumpig,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=p9Ao0FH9,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-09-20T15:06:22.934+0000) > > If they remove promos they would have to make it so you demote the second your lp drops below that tier. if your plat 4 at 10 lp and then lose 16 lp you would be gold 1 with 94 lp. I just hope you understand that. By that logic, if you have to win 3/5 games to get into gold. Than, you should have to lose 3 games to get demoted. Hope you understand that. Few seasons ago I was Silver 1, in series, lost 12 games in a row and went all the way down to Silver 5 in a span of like two days; where it took me several weeks to climb to that point. Granted, this was several seasons back; HOWEVER, I highly doubt it's changed that much or at all. I don't even bother to play ranked anymore seeing as it's 90% luck on getting at least 1 to 2 competent teammates. The entire system is a joke and it's been one for years. Nothing has, nor will it ever change. This game might be turning 10 years old, but it's still the same frustrating and miserable game to play. Half of us still play because we've invested to much money in it, they're seriously addicted to this game, or alternative games out there just aren't as appealing despite the aggravation that comes with this game. There's a reason why almost every other player community of other games talk so poorly of ours, it's not just the gamers that are toxic it's the GAME itself.
Demotion protection is definitely a thing. After you get promoted, you have a grace period where you can't be demoted. If they get rid of promotion matches, they'd have to get rid of that as well.
Kai Guy (NA)
: Yea and players have varying rates of averages. Why the distribution models matter. You need your model to account for majority's ranges. Still averages will populate naturally, more games the more they fall into a range of consistency till you can divide them into outliers and standard. One of the reasons sapmagic seems to be enamored with Positional MM is it helps reduce the Gap in performances. My opinion is a lot of the ladder have similar skill at the game but suffer from consistency issues, as you improve consistency you climb. Its not just getting amazing mechanics to have higher values on your best cases, cutting away the excess weak performances will improve your rank. Look at the # of folks who have a massive list of champions at 1-5 games and weak win rates. Often times they combine to eat their best champions wins resulting in them hovering at their MMR. Take away 16-28 losses from randomized one off games some one did for no discernable reason and that impacts their position. Players are almost always going to use their good and better performances and write off "weak" and bad games. Like if you roll a dice. 5.5 Is the average for a d10 but if you ignore lower roles you view that same dice at a higher average. An extrema case would be to ignore anything under 9 which results in 9.5. That dice would think its self to be 40% superior to its peers averages.
Ya, that's why I really liked the concept of the positionals. It's a pity to me that they were scrapped. It's why I always try to keep my teammates from ragging on someone playing poorly. It's, realistically, quite likely that that same player was carrying hard just last game... but, consistency is just not there yet.
Kai Guy (NA)
: MM stops the moment a lobby is made. Player decisions are everything after that point. If I dared you to play Crit {{champion:16}} adc your next ranked game. Then you did it. How in the hell is MM gonna predict you would do that? Set realistic expectations. Target issues, This is very much a player behavior problem if its related to in game issues. MM is MMR. MMR is objective. How the game plays or what the experience is like does not matter to MMR. Just Probability and %'s
Yep, the reality is that most players sub-masters are inconsistent. Matchmaking can only account for your AVERAGE performance, but if that average is defined by one REALLY good performance and one REALLY bad performance... then the MM system has no idea which one of you is going to show up that game. If the really good you shows up, then it looks like you weren't matched against strong enough opponents, if the really BAD you shows up, then it looks like you were matched against way too good opponents.
Jøkèr (NA)
: Get rid of promo games.
I guess they should also remove the demotion protection then, since the reason it exists is because once you've successfully completed the series, you get a bit of a grace period to prove you deserve to be there. Ugh, this just sounds like it'd make ranked so boring.
Lo4ding (EUNE)
: Honestly, I dont know why people on these boards hate pyke that much or is it only NA thing? Because I have never met anyone who does not like pyke, lik seriously. Pyke design is fine. He just needs a little tweaks. Remove double gold and revert it to full gold for assistance and slight nerf to passive regeneration. There are far worse champions that does (Except ulti) much better job on what pyke does. Bloody AP/Tank Nautilus deals more damage, have better CC and survive much much more and that is just one.
No, there is nothing that is a worse design than Pyke. Nautilus IS op right now, but it's not a design problem, it's a balance problem. Nautilus' numbers are just too high. His design is fine though, overall. Pyke has no weakness. His kit has functionally everything: He has two sources of CC. He has two escape tools(dash and invis). He has BONKERS sustain. He has stupid scaling - he triple dips on offensive stats, basically, since he gets extra damage from lethality(beyond just the normal effect), and even gets bonus offensive stats from defensive stats. He has tank-level base stats. He has a snowball mechanic which ALSO doubles as a catchup mechanic. He has a hard execute. He has a displace effect. Literally the only thing he lacks is good wave clear. And that's not really a weakness. With most hook champs, your goal is to poke them so that if they try to engage, you still win the fight. With Pyke, that doesn't work, 'cause he just goes out of LoS for 2 seconds and heals most of the poke you did back up. Endlessly. Most assassins, you have to just stop them from getting ahead, because they're not very good from behind... with Pyke, he has a HARD execute, so he just needs to land that once and the team gets DOUBLE GOLD from the kill, so it just takes one or two kills for him to go from insanely behind to ahead. Most squishy supports, you wait for them to try to engage, avoid it, then dive them.... not so with Pyke, he just dashes away and goes invis when you try to dive. Problem avoided. He needs a remake to get rid of his safety. A champ that scales AND snowballs that well, should not be that safe. Ditch the stupid grey health mechanic, make his dash shorter-range if not used in the direction of an enemy champ(or make it require a target as opposed to a location)... something to remove his safety. That's the problem. If he was PUNISHABLE, he'd be healthy. But he's not.
: > [{quoted}](name=Eleshakai,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=f4jA20aA,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2019-09-19T19:14:41.764+0000) > > Alright, I'll bite. How would **you** design the system, given the following criteria: > > 1) Your system can have no false positives at all. > 2) Your system has to be looking at behaviour patterns, not item purchases. > 3) Your system has to be completely automatic. > > Given that, what would you have it look for? > > If a high school student can do it... surely you can, right? from my studies with bots in the coop-ai we understand a lot about the mechanics of the players, the build is certainly a clue as is the kill participation and the k / da, but this can be mistaken for a bad game, but there are others data to be taken into account. after which you can check the movement made by the player in comparison to the rest of the team, compare it with other cases of other inter and look for analogies, the damages done, as made make it clear if the death was intentional or not, then counter the use of spell or other means of evasion, and compare it with other game passes 1,2,3 times, but not 18 ... after the chat can help, see if it makes explicit its intentions ... --- remember every action we take is a logical set of thoughts that even a computer could perform. in any case sorry for the English. It's 3AM and I had no balls to translate, so I use google translate
> [{quoted}](name=TheViceroys,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=f4jA20aA,comment-id=00190000,timestamp=2019-09-19T22:42:15.789+0000) > > from my studies with bots in the coop-ai we understand a lot about the mechanics of the players, the build is certainly a clue as is the kill participation and the k / da, but this can be mistaken for a bad game, but there are others data to be taken into account. after which you can check the movement made by the player in comparison to the rest of the team, compare it with other cases of other inter and look for analogies, the damages done, as made make it clear if the death was intentional or not, then counter the use of spell or other means of evasion, and compare it with other game passes 1,2,3 times, but not 18 ... after the chat can help, see if it makes explicit its intentions ... > --- > remember every action we take is a logical set of thoughts that even a computer could perform. in any case sorry for the English. It's 3AM and I had no balls to translate, so I use google translate No worries - google translate did fine in this case. I can understand your intent. I believe you're beginning to see the complexity though... even cases where the player's movement isn't aligned with the team, maybe there was just poor communication and they were aiming for differing objectives. That sort of a system is likely what Riot is trying to develop, but - while it may be pretty easy to develop for a single casepoint - it's much more complex when you consider it has to deal with millions of players playing in millions of different ways and accurately read the situation through billions of games. And thus... it becomes much harder to design. Like... I have a game where I went like 1-7-0 and i barely got to build any items before we lost... that could be seen as a troll game. But... as a collective team we only got one kill and we had like 30 deaths, so it was just 'one of those games'. Yes, it would be fairly easy to create a set of very specific criteria that would catch like... two people each(0 kills or assists and more than 5 deaths over 15 games, only bought rejuv beads - as an example). But that's a waste of dev time. And... players are really good at figuring those sorts of things out, so the trolls would just adjust their behaviour the tiniest bit to avoid it. I'm not saying this to say Riot shouldn't try or even to say that Riot is doing a good job of this... just to say that the problem is a lot harder to solve holistically without ALSO punishing a LOT of innocent players than most people think.
: https://u.gg/lol/champions/pyke/build?rank=challenger 36% banrate in challenger. https://u.gg/lol/champions/pyke/build Also only 41% ban rate in general with a really average 50% winrate. This is the website that Riot has said most closely reflects their internal statistics.
That's what I figured. While I do agree Pyke is Riot's worst designed champ... he is not currently imbalanced, he's just.... not fun to have in the game. Pyke doesn't need nerfs, Pyke needs a REDESIGN. A redesign that de-emphasizes his gold gain, removes his sustain, and limits his escape tools to make him the high-risk assassin he SHOULD be.
Saezio (EUNE)
: We have polar opposite points of view. I wish all champions had high skill floors and ceillings and all of them had the potential to cause the same frustration as a pyke/yasuo/akali/katarina/riven. But I can understand people that don't want to play these kind of champions and prefer more chill champions are upset when these high risk high reward champions are viable. Because they only remember the times they get destroyed and forget all the times that these champions are just non-factors. I do not think Nami is a well designed champion, I think she is a very boring champion that has very small mechanical requirements. And I think it is an atrocity that she maintains such a high win and play rate in such a high elo. If equally easy to play champions had the same stats but in positions like top/jungle people would be rampant. For example champions like Yi/Trynda/Garen/Darius in diamond+ games
Fortunately for me... Riot's dev team agrees with me on how to balance the game. *shrugs* So I guess you're playing the wrong game? That being said... Nami has two slow-moving, potentially high-impact skillshots, a high mana-cost heal that actually has a pretty significant decision tree to it, and usually builds at least two active items, which add more decisions. She's not a low skill-cap champ. She's just not oppressive, because she doesn't do 10 billion damage. Trust me, the gap between low-skill Nami and high-skill Nami players is MASSIVE. Also: To be clear, I don't generally have a problem with most of the champs you named. Pyke, however, is broken. He is not 'high risk' - he has insane mobility, invisibility, ridiculous damage, insane scaling, a gold-catchup/snowball mechanic, self-heal that can heal him to near-full from almost nothing, and high movement speed. He even has a full execute AND two cc abilities for if he somehow doesn't snowball so he can 'stay relevant'. There is NOTHING risky about playing Pyke.
: That's why people complain about the LOL report system...
Alright, I'll bite. How would **you** design the system, given the following criteria: 1) Your system can have no false positives at all. 2) Your system has to be looking at behaviour patterns, not item purchases. 3) Your system has to be completely automatic. Given that, what would you have it look for? If a high school student can do it... surely you can, right?
Yenn (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=DerMangoJoghurt,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EBs8ZE2x,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-09-19T09:54:12.976+0000) > > One plating is worth 160 gold, one kill is worth 300. Getting 3 kills worth of gold is impossible just by breaking plates. For 2 kills he'd need to break 4 plates, which is virtually impossible to do within the time span of a regular roam. Usually you get 1-2 plates if your opponent leaves the lane. > > If you roam resulting in a kill and an assist, your team gained more gold than 2 platings are worth. Kills are generally worth less than 300 gold after the first couple minutes of the game. You'll never see a game where every kill you get is worth 300 gold. The total gold is 1250, and the turret is generally gone after the second roam. It averages to slightly more than 2 kills, likely closer to 3 with reduced bounties. Also, all of this gold is concentrated on one champion. This is far more effective than having the gold split, which is why team gold is a relatively useless indicator unless it's significantly higher for one team. A champion with a full item advantage can easily 1v2 or 1v3, even if the score and team gold is relatively even.
If a person is taking more than one plate in the time it takes you to roam, either you're setting up your roams wrong or they're getting help from their jungler or another laner. If the latter is the case, the gold isn't concentrated on one person.
: So according to your own Metrics Pyke should of gotten nerfed by now Riot
https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2019/05/dev-champion-balance-framework/ For below ~plat the threshold is 54.5% win rate if their ban rate is low, or 52.5% win rate if their ban rate is high For plat -> masters, the threshold is 54% win rate with a low ban rate, or 52% win rate with a high ban rate. For challenger, the threshold is 45% ban rate For pro play, it's 90% presence If a champion meets any of those four criteria, they get nerfed. So unless that 65% ban rate is specifically at Challenger, they're not breaking their balance criteria... that being said, I believe since this patch is the world's patch, they may be paying less attention to solo queue balance temporarily to ensure a stable playing field for worlds...
D357R0Y3R (EUW)
: Balance team is buffing TOO MUCH
Bear in mind that MOST small numerical changes are directly driven from the balance framework... so if a lot of buffs happen, it means there were more champions below the threshold than there were above the threshold at this specific time.
Saezio (EUNE)
: So, feelings should be more important than actual strengths and weaknesses of a champion when it comes to balancing them. This is your opinion. My opinion is the opposite. Different schools of thought I have to say.
I'm stating facts: A well designed champion feels balanced even when they're not. A poorly designed champion feels imbalanced even when they're balanced. I 100% support Riot's current balance framework, which targets any champion with changes - regardless of feel - for being factually too strong. But I also believe that, in order to make a fun game, you have to re-design champions who create that feeling of oppression even when they're balanced. Champions like Pyke. He may not be factually overpowered, but he IS factually badly designed. This is why having two separate groups working on the game is a good thing: A balance team to make numbers and small kit changes to ensure good balance, and a champion re-design team to perform larger, deeper changes to champion kits to help bring them into a place where people don't despise them regardless of how balanced they are. These two teams are both essential to a successful game... because if you have a game where every champ has a perfectly 50% win-rate... but people hate every champ because none of them feel good to play against... then it doesn't really matter that it is balanced, you're still not going to have any players. Similarly if you have a game where all the champs are fun to play as and against, but some of them have like 85% win-rates... nobody will want to play because games will feel decided before they start. These are both bad outcomes. Nami, while strong, is not so strong that she's out of line. She also isn't a champ that people hate to see because she doesn't make you feel like you didn't have a chance. This is why she doesn't get changes. If her winrate goes up much more, she'll cross the 'too strong' line and get targeted for minor nerfs. But she's not there yet, and that's a positive for the game IMO. Pyke, while perhaps not overpowered, has a crazy high ban rate, and NOBODY likes to see him in ANY role on the enemy team. That means that he should probably be targeted for deep kit-level changes because his kit is unhealthy - regardless of whether he is numerically balanced. He is a badly designed champ.
: Yeah he gets way too much gold. And him already being hit and run makes him wayyyy too good for being just a support
He also scales super well with items, so if he DOES get gold, he becomes obscenely strong.
: Lowest HP in game (minus Ani?), miss Q and eliminated, Heal pretty subpar before you get AP - mana cost is crazy pre fully stacked mana rune. E is okay but meta ADC's barely use auto's and (Kaisa in 50% of games) will have ulted far from you to buff them. The ult is good. She's not overloaded.. skilled bubbles are rewarded justly. The meta is hook champs anyway, Nautilus vs. her will result in some roasted fish sticks.
Nautilus is flat out broken as a support. He's the reason I can't ban Pyke like I want to. lol
Exibir mais

Eleshakai

Nível 106 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão