EPT[Patch 1.0.0.129: Fizz] General Discussion - Page 144
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Unentschieden
Germany1471 Posts
| ||
|
Skithiryx
Australia648 Posts
On November 28 2011 02:24 spinesheath wrote: At 200+ ping it definitely starts behaving like a skillshot. People are so funny with pings, 200ms is actually pretty low and still playable, you just need to adjust, Australia to NA is always 180-220ms. It's also funny to watch someone go from 180ms to 20, it's like playing ladder v custom local games on SC2 all of your timing gets thrown out and you make Alot of mistake. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On November 28 2011 07:05 TwoToneTerran wrote: I'm not saying it isn't hard but his stun is an instant aoe targettable spell, just like Annie's, even it's more difficult. I was just using sob3k's standards. Though if he really wants a nonskillshot guy then seriously, Ryze and Zilean -- both incredibly strong ap mids without even the slightest need to aim anything. I don't really think that Veigar stun is that hard to hit. Maybe it's cause I played a ton of Veigar when I first started playing LoL but you don't even have to lead people with it like Heimer stun or Swain snare. Just aim the edge of the circle where they're standing and stun them. As for teams with egos that was discussed a few pages ago, that's bullshit. Most teams are filled with people who have huge egos and think they're always right because that's how most professionals in any competitive game or sport are. Not to mention constant bickering and fighting with players or coaches yelling at each other. And, not that it matters, but when TSM was a much stronger team they actually argued a lot more than they do now. The only problem that CLG might be having would be not listening to calls but that's something that they seem to be working on. | ||
|
rigwarl
United States540 Posts
| ||
|
taLbuk
Madagascar1879 Posts
On November 28 2011 10:43 rigwarl wrote: Has anyone ever had their name reported and changed? I logged in and apparently my name is now "Unicorns I love", didn't get any email or notification about it. ahah what was it before? but yeah if riot thinks your name is inappropriate they just change it, pretty sure they email you though. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On November 28 2011 10:07 Offhand wrote: IIRC patch 1.41 and 1.42 were very close together and both heavily favored protoss and the general response was that it was way too much too fast, this same forum seems to have a different opinion on LoL. They were longer than 2 weeks apart though. At this point I realize I've treaded on many a poster's happy place, so I'll just quietly back out now. Comparing StarCraft patches with LoL patches doesn't work. LoL essentially has like 80+ (or however many champs there are) races for a player to learn and for Riot to worry about balanced. Blizzard only needs to balance three races. That's a lot of extra work on Riot to ensure that their game is balanced and there aren't any champions that are too powerful while also giving their design teams time to think of ways to improve the weaker champions. Also, most champions get pretty minor buffs and nerfs. It's not like every patch all of the champions change and everyone else has to adjust. With the number of moving parts in LoL I actually think a steady patch cycle makes sense so long as no major buffs or nerfs happen unless they're necessary to fix a super OP or super UP champion. I do agree that the rate they release champions is kind of silly from a balance stand point but I don't think it breaks the balance of the game at a competitive level because of the ban system and the fact that at tournaments brand new champions are never going to be available. I'm not gonna try and touch the mastery changes and jungle changes. But if you're citing those as reasons LoL isn't balanced then, to me at least, I would believe that you thought that the game was balanced prior to those changes. Regardless I don't think the new masteries ruined LoL's balance and I doubt the jungle change will either. If they do I'm pretty confident Riot will fix it. For a StarCraft comparison, saying the mastery or jungle changes break the balance of the game would be exactly like saying HotS is going to break the balance of SC2. Even if it does, who cares? Blizzard will fix it. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 28 2011 09:55 ninjakingcola wrote: And would you want the game to stagnate for the rest of it's existence? Riot is attempting to fix problems in playstyle that are actively found by players using and abusing champions for all they are worth. If Riot didn't constantly update and/or produce new content then the game would be figured out completely, it would stagnate, and there wouldn't be nearly the exciting metagame there is today. That, and the fact that there is a metagame at all proves your statement about no real "archtype" being able to be established completely invalid. The thing is, they change it way too fast. The time it takes for the metagame to stagnate is orders of magnitude longer than their current patch cycle. If it takes months or years for changes to settle down and be analyzed properly, it makes no sense for patches to come every 2 weeks. Consider that even after Blizzard stopped patching BW, it took like 4 years for people to standardize fast expansion openings in PvZ, which is a MONUMENTAL shift in the way the game was played. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 28 2011 10:52 overt wrote: Comparing StarCraft patches with LoL patches doesn't work. LoL essentially has like 80+ (or however many champs there are) races for a player to learn and for Riot to worry about balanced. Blizzard only needs to balance three races. That's a lot of extra work on Riot to ensure that their game is balanced and there aren't any champions that are too powerful while also giving their design teams time to think of ways to improve the weaker champions. Also, most champions get pretty minor buffs and nerfs. It's not like every patch all of the champions change and everyone else has to adjust. The time it takes for players to formulate a reasonable impression of a new champion is roughly on the order of 2-3 months--you have to get through the initial phase where people don't know how to play them, and then subsequently the period where they're "FotM" because no one knows how to counter them. Adjusting a champion prior to that is going to be counter-productive, because you're using incomplete information to try and make changes, and just slowing down the rate at which people can properly analyze the champion because of it. Even if you make the point that they don't adjust every champion in every patch, champions get tweaked far sooner than 2-3 months after a release/major rework, which is how we end up with scenarios where champions get overnerfed or overbuffed. | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:04 TheYango wrote: The thing is, they change it way too fast. The time it takes for the metagame to stagnate is orders of magnitude longer than their current patch cycle. If it takes months or years for changes to settle down and be analyzed properly, it makes no sense for patches to come every 2 weeks. Consider that even after Blizzard stopped patching BW, it took like 4 years for people to standardize fast expansion openings in PvZ, which is a MONUMENTAL shift in the way the game was played. "Too fast" presupposes that Riot's goal is to tweak LoL those tiny, incremental steps to "balance". For SC, there was not the sterling balance everyone reveres until BW. For LoL there is not necessarily going to be LoL:BW. I kind of think of Season 2 as the expansion pack. We got new masteries and new jungle. There are tons of valid arguments to be made about whether the choices Riot are making are good or bad for the game. However, Riot appears to be saying that they like LoL and like the general balance that LoL has, but they are not satisfied with the core mechanics of the game. They're not fine-tuning balance, they're still taking a hacksaw to the formula at the heart of the game. For as long as that's going on, I don't think there is such a thing as "too fast". Clearly there is a balancing act here where if you change too much too consistently then you make it impossible for more casual players to make heads or tails of an already complicated game with many heros. However, this early in a new Season, I think some extra volatility is to be expected, in the same way that you would expect volatility when a SC2 expansion pack comes out. I don't mean this to disagree with you, necessarily, but I think people are arguing from different places on this issues. I think that LoL could maybe be fine if Riot only made incremental balance tweaks on a much slower schedule, but I Riot isn't happy with the fundamental equation and so they're patching more and patching frequently. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:11 Takkara wrote: "Too fast" presupposes that Riot's goal is to tweak LoL those tiny, incremental steps to "balance". For SC, there was not the sterling balance everyone reveres until BW. For LoL there is not necessarily going to be LoL:BW. I kind of think of Season 2 as the expansion pack. We got new masteries and new jungle. There are tons of valid arguments to be made about whether the choices Riot are making are good or bad for the game. However, Riot appears to be saying that they like LoL and like the general balance that LoL has, but they are not satisfied with the core mechanics of the game. They're not fine-tuning balance, they're still taking a hacksaw to the formula at the heart of the game. For as long as that's going on, I don't think there is such a thing as "too fast". Clearly there is a balancing act here where if you change too much too consistently then you make it impossible for more casual players to make heads or tails of an already complicated game with many heros. However, this early in a new Season, I think some extra volatility is to be expected, in the same way that you would expect volatility when a SC2 expansion pack comes out. I don't mean this to disagree with you, necessarily, but I think people are arguing from different places on this issues. I think that LoL could maybe be fine if Riot only made incremental balance tweaks on a much slower schedule, but I Riot isn't happy with the fundamental equation and so they're patching more and patching frequently. If they're making the admission that they want to gut the core mechanics of the game, and deal with balance later, they shouldn't be throwing a 5 million dollar prize pool into competitive events when they KNOW the game isn't ready for them. | ||
|
rigwarl
United States540 Posts
On November 28 2011 10:50 taLbuk wrote: ahah what was it before? but yeah if riot thinks your name is inappropriate they just change it, pretty sure they email you though. My name has been Dongtown for like nearly a thousand games =( I noticed "dong" is censored so.... meh Oh well. Unicorns I love isn't that bad, I'm not even mad. Just kinda surprised I didn't get an email notification. In other news, I got my first loss after 130 or so games at 600 ELO =P clearly can't carry | ||
|
pschiu
Singapore410 Posts
What happens is just as I'm about to die, I press R (and possibly click on the target), and before any visible sign of the ultimate appears, I die, so I'm not sure if I pressed R before or after I died. When I respawn, I notice that the ultimate is cooling down, which seems to mean I did use it, but then immediately died. Then when I right-click to move about, the character does not do his normal walking animation anymore, but just moves about frozen motionless. Edit: And curiously, for Yorick, if I ultied myself in this way just as I die, I don't get my reanimation, so it seemed like I didn't manage to ulti myself in time. But when I respawn, hey my ulti is cooling down! So it's not just a cosmetic bug. | ||
|
ninjakingcola
United States405 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:04 TheYango wrote: The thing is, they change it way too fast. The time it takes for the metagame to stagnate is orders of magnitude longer than their current patch cycle. If it takes months or years for changes to settle down and be analyzed properly, it makes no sense for patches to come every 2 weeks. Consider that even after Blizzard stopped patching BW, it took like 4 years for people to standardize fast expansion openings in PvZ, which is a MONUMENTAL shift in the way the game was played. They change it way to fast is merely your opinion. The current system of patching the game every two weeks is actually one of the most efficient ways to keep a game with the current level of new content coming out balanced. It means that if Riot breaks something in an update, they can bounce back and fix it in the next. With the new champions coming out so often (a bit too often imo, but I still like the influx of content) it's necessary for Riot to tweak the numbers and look at the game as a dynamic structure. Two weeks may seem like an insanely short time to have between updating, but if you consider the actual level of balancing they do on a weekly basis and the overall impact the updates have I think it's easy to see they're making it work. And though it did take BW quite a bit of time to develop it's accepted meta, LoL has a much more dynamic meta that (too me at least) seems flexible enough to incorporate all champions in some way shape or form and makes an amazingly large set of situations that can occur in a game to make it fun and exciting. | ||
|
ninjakingcola
United States405 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:14 TheYango wrote: If they're making the admission that they want to gut the core mechanics of the game, and deal with balance later, they shouldn't be throwing a 5 million dollar prize pool into competitive events when they KNOW the game isn't ready for them. They're not just throwing 5 million into a game that isn't ready. The game has a competitive scene that works night and day on strategy and tactics with the goal of winning games. There are sponsored teams and tournaments, the game wouldn't have such a scene if it wasn't ready to be played competitively. You're being quite shortsighted here. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:24 ninjakingcola wrote: They change it way to fast is merely your opinion. The current system of patching the game every two weeks is actually one of the most efficient ways to keep a game with the current level of new content coming out balanced. It means that if Riot breaks something in an update, they can bounce back and fix it in the next. With the new champions coming out so often (a bit too often imo, but I still like the influx of content) it's necessary for Riot to tweak the numbers and look at the game as a dynamic structure. Two weeks may seem like an insanely short time to have between updating, but if you consider the actual level of balancing they do on a weekly basis and the overall impact the updates have I think it's easy to see they're making it work. And though it did take BW quite a bit of time to develop it's accepted meta, LoL has a much more dynamic meta that (too me at least) seems flexible enough to incorporate all champions in some way shape or form and makes an amazingly large set of situations that can occur in a game to make it fun and exciting. Again, you have to consider that a higher rate of updates means that they reduce the reliability of the data which they're using to judge how a champion is doing. People don't instantly figure out how to play a champion. They don't instantly respond to changes. It takes on the order of 2-3 months for a new champion to get figured out. Changing the champion before then is going to be based on incomplete information (because you don't know where the champion actually lies in relation to other champions), and is going to delay the ability for people to properly analyze the champion (because they have to play with the new changes and re-assess certain aspects of that champion). In practice, this has proven to be problematic many times already. It's been the case many times now where they've buffed a champion that turned out to have been fine (when initial impressions said the champion was underpowered), and thus made the champion OP. Likewise there have been times where they've overnerfed a champion because they made changes in response to an issue, and then continued to make nerfs because the community hadn't reassessed the champion's strength after the changes yet. | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
| ||
|
MoonBear
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:20 rigwarl wrote: My name has been Dongtown for like nearly a thousand games =( I noticed "dong" is censored so.... meh Oh well. Unicorns I love isn't that bad, I'm not even mad. Just kinda surprised I didn't get an email notification. In other news, I got my first loss after 130 or so games at 600 ELO =P clearly can't carry Send in a support ticket if there's a different name you would like. Just explain that one of the Player Supports changed your name because it was possibly offensive. (I'm personally surprised they didn't choose an even more trollier name. But I guess it was a Brony Player Support. I have an idea who, lol) Col v EG starting now! Real IEM Kiev Qualifiers. Who ever wins EG v Col will want to throw game against Curse to avoid playing TSM. Then winner of that will want to throw when playing Dignitas to avoid playing CLG. CLG vent found this scenario hilarious in a sad way. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:31 Takkara wrote: For what it's worth, I attribute any lack of developing meta purely on the lack of practice of the top teams and the lack of competition at the top end of competitive LoL, far more so than whiplash on balancing by Riot. The arrival of teams like Dignitas on the scene, the amazing European scene, the multiple asian scenes, and things like the TSM gaming house will push the meta farther than if we had stagnant changes in the game. At least, in my humble opinion. Even if the rate at which new knowledge is discovered increases, it's not going to get to the point where a new champion's potential is properly analyzed within the 2-week span between patches. If they're going to keep the 2-week patch cycle, they need to at least stop knee-jerk fixing freshly released champions before they've been out for 3 months, or knee-jerk nerfing in response to new FotMs. If nothing else, it promotes the bad attitude in the playerbase where if they whine enough, they'll get a champion buffed/nerfed within 2 weeks instead of actually spending time figuring out how to deal with the problem. | ||
|
Bladeorade
United States1898 Posts
On November 28 2011 11:32 MoonBear wrote: Send in a support ticket if there's a different name you would like. Just explain that one of the Player Supports changed your name because it was possibly offensive. (I'm personally surprised they didn't choose an even more trollier name. But I guess it was a Brony Player Support. I have an idea who, lol) Col v EG starting now! Real IEM Kiev Qualifiers. Who ever wins EG v Col will want to throw game against Curse to avoid playing TSM. Then winner of that will want to throw when playing Dignitas to avoid playing CLG. CLG vent found this scenario hilarious in a sad way. link to stream? | ||
| ||
