|
Want to rage about your latest loss? Use the QQ thread. If you whine in GD, you'll get warned. |
On December 07 2011 12:34 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 12:22 BlackPaladin wrote:
Starcraft BW had a % chance that a projectile would miss if fired up a ramp.........................
Just throwing that out there. Thank you. Because people didn't think rts games should be "based off luck" starcraft 2 was plagued with countless 4gate tournament victories and marine all-ins. Don't let this get fotm too. I still regret even thinking that there was some truth to not having luck in pro games. *looks down and nods head sideways disappointingly."
Well any game where there is incomplete information has some element of luck in it, whether starcraft or starcraft 2. If you want a pro game with no luck beyond what each player brings to their performance you have to look at total-knowledge games like Go or Chess.
|
United States47024 Posts
On December 07 2011 12:33 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
and then we're back to the question about normalized damage breaking the game or not. One thing I actually miss from dota is that heroes didn't do static damage. That's probably the only thing I actually miss though ^_^
Lasthitting as/against Chaos Knight--one of the funniest and most rage-inducing experiences ever.
|
On December 07 2011 12:22 BlackPaladin wrote:
Starcraft BW had a % chance that a projectile would miss if fired up a ramp
Just throwing that out there.
That was also one of the single most hated aspects of BW.
|
United States47024 Posts
On December 07 2011 12:40 Craton wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 12:22 BlackPaladin wrote:
Starcraft BW had a % chance that a projectile would miss if fired up a ramp
Just throwing that out there. That was also one of the single most hated aspects of BW.
Funny then that there were multiple TL articles written about why it should have been left in SC2.
|
Shocking that after 12 years there would people who don't want something to change.
There were tons of people and posts in favor of it being removed. You don't write articles on that.
|
I personally thought the high ground advantage in BW made positioning more interesting on certain maps.
|
The advantage did, but not the RNG of it. You can have one without the other. If there's anything I've learned from a lifetime spent playing video games it's that RNG should be avoided as much as humanly possible in any game with a competitive setting.
|
they should add high ground advantage into league of legends D:
|
hidden your sig is freaking annoying.
I think crit existing is ok, in the late game attack speeds are higher and positioning is sufficiently important that it only adds drama, it's functionally close enough to non-random that it avoids hurting the game. I mean it's a pretty entertaining mechanic, not like dodge which just gives you the agony of defeat.
Having a lane decided early by crit runes or natively high crit chance like tryndamere has gives zero value to the game though, I don't see any reason to have that around. I like yango's solution.
|
Tryndamere himself is easy enough to fix, too, just move the crit chance to his %health missing on his Q and the flat AD bonus to his rage. It makes no sense to build crit so that you build your fury faster with the current system anyway, it's redundant. Alternatively, you could just remove the health missing component since it's hidden power and have him use only one steroid scaling by level, dependent on his fury, preferably flat AD.
|
On December 07 2011 12:39 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 12:33 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
and then we're back to the question about normalized damage breaking the game or not. One thing I actually miss from dota is that heroes didn't do static damage. That's probably the only thing I actually miss though ^_^ Lasthitting as/against Chaos Knight--one of the funniest and most rage-inducing experiences ever.
Chaos Knight was just stupidly random. I hate that retard 
|
On December 07 2011 12:58 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 12:39 TheYango wrote:On December 07 2011 12:33 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
and then we're back to the question about normalized damage breaking the game or not. One thing I actually miss from dota is that heroes didn't do static damage. That's probably the only thing I actually miss though ^_^ Lasthitting as/against Chaos Knight--one of the funniest and most rage-inducing experiences ever. Chaos Knight was just stupidly random. I hate that retard
CK has nothing on Ogre. Old school Ogre with a 15% chance of x5 casting fireblast was so awesome/frustrating.
I personally like some randomness in my games. It keeps things from getting stale. It make you gamble a bit when you commit, and it can liven things up. That boring top lane that was GP vs. Cho? Well, GP just crit Cho on his first Q, and now Cho has to either play defensive and get zoned, or call for a gank.
I don't mind randomness as long as it all evens out. As long as the sample size gets big enough that it doesn't decide games. I wouldn't be opposed to getting ride of the 4% crit talent, because it might be a bit too easy to get that annoying bit of crit chance, but I don't want anything more drastic.
Personally, I like the dodge mechanic as well, and think that Riot could have done a lot more with it. Itemized with it better, added it to lots of tanking gear, and added anti-dodge items and minimum damage items to counter it. I like multipliers, whether it is damage or durability, and I think losing something like dodge or crit take depth away from the game.
|
On December 07 2011 12:49 UniversalSnip wrote:
hidden your sig is freaking annoying.
I think crit existing is ok, in the late game attack speeds are higher and positioning is sufficiently important that it only adds drama, it's functionally close enough to non-random that it avoids hurting the game. I mean it's a pretty entertaining mechanic, not like dodge which just gives you the agony of defeat.
Having a lane decided early by crit runes or natively high crit chance like tryndamere has gives zero value to the game though, I don't see any reason to have that around. I like yango's solution.
Sig removed.
Crit does add game value though. It gives the game excitement and people like watching large chunks of health disappear in fights. Or do you not consider entertainment value to be a part of the total value of the game.
You basically get an 18% chance to crit with just runes and masteries right? That's a 3% chance to crit twice in a row in two shots.
|
What do people think of the Pseudo Random Distribution system? It actually helps prevent things like double crits when you have such a small chance of critting. Maybe I'm overthinking this, but if you have a string of attacks on a champion after you haven't crit for awhile, those would become extremely favorable to land a critical attack. With only a 4% chance to crit this becomes almost meaningless because the range of attacks it'd take would be far too large to abuse I'd guess, but still interesting to think about.
I feel like I get more and more insane with my guesswork/theorycrafting as the night rolls further along. Maybe I should just go to sleep ^_^
|
Not to detract too much from the crit debate, but I'm curious what people do with "unconventional" lanes. For someone like Nasus, this could be unexpectedly running into a ranged AD in top lane. For me in my very last game it was Vayne-Sona running into Ryze-Swain. I figure that its very lane dependent, but if you find yourself in an unconventional lane you need to assess their threat and then play accordingly, right?
Like, I remember one time I played Caitlyn against Teemo-Tryndamere lane which ended up being really easy to just force the melee out of the lane with constant pressure early on. However, in the Vayne vs 2 AP lane (not expected), armor runes are not useful, armor masteries are not useful, and trading isn't always in your interest because they can double burst you while you get like 1.5x burst from a utility-DPS.
What I finally settled on was just getting the CS I could get and then waiting for late game where our team roflstomped them. But I was lower CS and just really having a less threatful game. I guess, as long as your lane doesn't lose, that's kinda contributing to the team winning, right?
|
I would like to get rid of the proc chance on madreds as well, that really bothers me. The worst is accidentally stealing buffs haha.
On December 07 2011 13:29 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 12:49 UniversalSnip wrote:
hidden your sig is freaking annoying.
I think crit existing is ok, in the late game attack speeds are higher and positioning is sufficiently important that it only adds drama, it's functionally close enough to non-random that it avoids hurting the game. I mean it's a pretty entertaining mechanic, not like dodge which just gives you the agony of defeat.
Having a lane decided early by crit runes or natively high crit chance like tryndamere has gives zero value to the game though, I don't see any reason to have that around. I like yango's solution. Sig removed. Crit does add game value though. It gives the game excitement and people like watching large chunks of health disappear in fights. Or do you not consider entertainment value to be a part of the total value of the game. You basically get an 18% chance to crit with just runes and masteries right? That's a 3% chance to crit twice in a row in two shots.
I didn't speak clearly, I like having crit in the game but I don't see why it should be around early where the impact of binary crit/no crit is disproportionate. Later in the game you are basically going to get X attacks off in a fight because attacks per fight equals attack speed divided by positioning. There are times where you can crit someone and it'll just completely change how you play but for the most part that's not true, you'll attack for a certain amount of time and that's it. So crit chance adds a pretty consistent +% of damage through a fight. Higher armor values especially help smooth things out.
In lane, especially the first few levels, it's a completely different story. Trynd randomly critting you actually snowballs his advantage in a way that just doesn't happen in teamfights later on. It multiplies on itself and has a way bigger impact than a single dice roll on a single attack really should.
Like I said, I like crit because it's entertaining, but it does have downsides, and the game mechanics only really mitigate those downsides later in the game. Early game crit is just bullshit, it's a really obnoxious mechanic.
i'd go less far than yango and say keep brawler's gloves around, just make crit less accessible early game by ditching the masteries and runes. Is there anything more annoying than some awful gp runing for crit chance with the 'get lucky' plan and getting lucky? He might lose his lane 3/4 times but when the rng favors him there's just nothing you can do.
What do people think of the Pseudo Random Distribution system? It actually helps prevent things like double crits when you have such a small chance of critting. Maybe I'm overthinking this, but if you have a string of attacks on a champion after you haven't crit for awhile, those would become extremely favorable to land a critical attack. With only a 4% chance to crit this becomes almost meaningless because the range of attacks it'd take would be far too large to abuse I'd guess, but still interesting to think about.
I feel like I get more and more insane with my guesswork/theorycrafting as the night rolls further along. Maybe I should just go to sleep ^_^
They actually did change crit and dodge to pseudo random, with some finagling so you can't 'store' crits apparently. Not sure how it works, maybe #1 poster moonbear knows?
|
I would be OK with crit being only available through items. The runes are basically already never used except for gimmicks and the mastery could be replaced by something else.
|
On December 07 2011 14:06 Craton wrote:
I would be OK with crit being only available through items. The runes are basically already never used except for gimmicks and the mastery could be replaced by something else.
Why are crit runes not used? I don't really understand it. For Marks, the choice is between .95 flat AD, 1.66 armour penetration, and .93% crit chance. Armour penetration is really dependent on the target obviously, but it only takes ~100 damage for crit = flat AD, and any amount over that crit > ad. I realize crit doesn't scale with many skills, but since late game most carries have upwards of 300 AD, I would think that crit would be worthwhile.
For quints, I noticed that crit is much less efficient compared to the other stats, so maybe something like crit marks and AD quints could work. I think I am going to try it. I lose a little early game power (very little) for quite a bit of late game strength. I could see this being really nice on a carry with few AD scaling spells, and don't naturally build a lot of crit chance. Vayne for example.
|
Crit generally isnt runned because its too wonky. Its perfect when it works (ie level 1 crit), but if you dont crit you basically just threw away the entire laning phase because the armpen/ad combo on marks quints is much more efficient.
|
Between IE and PD, AD carries get plenty of crit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
