|
Public Service AnnouncementUse the Champion threads whenever appropriate. Don't use General Discussion simply out of ease. ===== If you want to whine about server lag, use the QQ thread. We all suffer alike when Riot servers kaput. No need to make a post about it in GD. |
On January 17 2012 16:02 r.Evo wrote:
Am I the only one who is annoyed that it seems like Riots business model is influencing champion balance more than an actual desire for balance?
Champ x is underplayed/new -> overbuff him till he gets permaban status, then remove half of those buffs ones he gets "old" and you can repeat the cycle with something new.
The regen on release Talon/Riven made no sense, kinda same for the overbuffs on shit like Skarner/Tryn. I'm more and more inclined that Riots business model (buy champs = money) means that there is no monetary interest in keeping LoL a balanced and stable game which can develop it's own metagame and counters.
PS: can someone who played Mundo before explain why he is NOT considered a viable pick solo top?
I choose to think its more they are just not all that smart when it comes to new champs. Like you can make the argument in a vacuum that a champ like riven or release trynd or talon would need high regen values to be able to compete in the top lane of 3 months ago because of the fact that back then EVERYONE who was top had absurd lifesteal or vamps, without actually realizing that once they killed off the obscene vamp champs that the ones left over (regen) would be op.
|
Most of Skarner nerfs make no sense. And they destroyed the new red...
|
It's hard to balance champs when most of your internal team is low Elo.
|
patch note says the it doesn't work on spells but it does
chauster plays jungle mundo and his q applies it
|
Patch isn't live yet, though?
|
|
|
On January 17 2012 16:11 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2012 16:02 r.Evo wrote:
Am I the only one who is annoyed that it seems like Riots business model is influencing champion balance more than an actual desire for balance?
Champ x is underplayed/new -> overbuff him till he gets permaban status, then remove half of those buffs ones he gets "old" and you can repeat the cycle with something new.
The regen on release Talon/Riven made no sense, kinda same for the overbuffs on shit like Skarner/Tryn. I'm more and more inclined that Riots business model (buy champs = money) means that there is no monetary interest in keeping LoL a balanced and stable game which can develop it's own metagame and counters.
PS: can someone who played Mundo before explain why he is NOT considered a viable pick solo top? I choose to think its more they are just not all that smart when it comes to new champs. Like you can make the argument in a vacuum that a champ like riven or release trynd or talon would need high regen values to be able to compete in the top lane of 3 months ago because of the fact that back then EVERYONE who was top had absurd lifesteal or vamps, without actually realizing that once they killed off the obscene vamp champs that the ones left over (regen) would be op.
Then that means that their teams don't communicate well and that they don't get input from strong players. Welp, the last part is definitly true. =P
What I mean is that, compared to dota, which somehow manages to have huge shifts in the game without big patches, riot babysits their customers 24/7. I'm not 100% sure why that is, but I'm inclined to attribute it to a "Champions have to sell"-attitude compared to "Our design team is full of nerds who want to create exciting stuff".
Once a champion pool reaches a certain amount of champs it, in theory, should be the case that every single champ is usefull under SOME circumstances. Combine the right champs and you have a working teamcomp. In the case of LoL Riot seems to DESIGN champions to be top/mid/ad/support/jungle instead of combining a set of abilities making them balanced in itself and see what the players do with it.
While I do understand that this is most likely what gives the largest amounts of casual players and champ sales (hint: $$$), I doubt it's good for the game itself.
tl;dr: I feel as if Riot is happy as fuck that they managed to find a "stable metagame" and try everything they can to further enforce it instead of throwing stuff out there that has the possibility to completely break it. Yes, it would make the game more complicated and therefore sell less at first, but it would also make it more interesting to watch.
Just comparing how many (somehow) working weird teamcomps I've seen in like 100ish DotA 2 games compared to how many different lol teamcomps (like the MOST someone can switch around without people flaming him to death is AP top vs AP bruiser. Or a ganky jungler vs a tanky one), I can't stop thinking that this is a pretty damn basic problem in riots design philosophy. =/
Edit: On January 17 2012 16:27 Craton wrote:
It's hard to balance champs when most of your internal team is low Elo.
Elo, as something representing skill, doesn't even matter that much. It's a matter of being able to design well or not. Someone who designs a formula 1 car doesn't have to be able to drive it to it's max, but he has to be able to understand the thought- and actionprocesses that a driver would make.
|
those Vlad buffs look HUGE
|
I'd probly agree with you abit but honestly, people pro's and regulars thought alot of those release champions where terrible, you had so and so 1k+ trynd game players saying trynd remake broke him, people threw away talon on release, same with riven and Skarner had terrible mana problems but yeah they did overdo it to a point thar was no decision on when to or not to spam it which has it's downfalls.
|
Patch in 1 hour.
On January 17 2012 16:30 r.Evo wrote:
Elo, as something representing skill, doesn't even matter that much. It's a matter of being able to design well or not. Someone who designs a formula 1 car doesn't have to be able to drive it to it's max, but he has to be able to understand the thought- and actionprocesses that a driver would make.
Not really accurate comparisons. You still have to balance a champ after you design it. When a large portion of your design and balance team are relatively unskilled (I think most are silver or below), it's very hard to actually look at the champ in a game and see what needs buffed or nerfed. It would make a world of difference if they actually had high elo players testing out new champs for a few games prior to its release. Even racecar designers are going to have extensive input and testing from actual qualified drivers before putting something on the market.
|
i think overall it looks good im just kind of peeved about the splash art malz and fiddle look so stupid now
|
So no Viktorbuff... what?
And the Vaynenerfs seem kinda odd to me. Its not the movementspeed that gets you killed, its her max W. Still thats untouched...
|
Time to pick up Mundo again.. ^^
|
United States47024 Posts
On January 17 2012 16:30 r.Evo wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 17 2012 16:11 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2012 16:02 r.Evo wrote:
Am I the only one who is annoyed that it seems like Riots business model is influencing champion balance more than an actual desire for balance?
Champ x is underplayed/new -> overbuff him till he gets permaban status, then remove half of those buffs ones he gets "old" and you can repeat the cycle with something new.
The regen on release Talon/Riven made no sense, kinda same for the overbuffs on shit like Skarner/Tryn. I'm more and more inclined that Riots business model (buy champs = money) means that there is no monetary interest in keeping LoL a balanced and stable game which can develop it's own metagame and counters.
PS: can someone who played Mundo before explain why he is NOT considered a viable pick solo top? I choose to think its more they are just not all that smart when it comes to new champs. Like you can make the argument in a vacuum that a champ like riven or release trynd or talon would need high regen values to be able to compete in the top lane of 3 months ago because of the fact that back then EVERYONE who was top had absurd lifesteal or vamps, without actually realizing that once they killed off the obscene vamp champs that the ones left over (regen) would be op. Then that means that their teams don't communicate well and that they don't get input from strong players. Welp, the last part is definitly true. =P What I mean is that, compared to dota, which somehow manages to have huge shifts in the game without big patches, riot babysits their customers 24/7. I'm not 100% sure why that is, but I'm inclined to attribute it to a "Champions have to sell"-attitude compared to "Our design team is full of nerds who want to create exciting stuff". Once a champion pool reaches a certain amount of champs it, in theory, should be the case that every single champ is usefull under SOME circumstances. Combine the right champs and you have a working teamcomp. In the case of LoL Riot seems to DESIGN champions to be top/mid/ad/support/jungle instead of combining a set of abilities making them balanced in itself and see what the players do with it. While I do understand that this is most likely what gives the largest amounts of casual players and champ sales (hint: $$$), I doubt it's good for the game itself. tl;dr: I feel as if Riot is happy as fuck that they managed to find a "stable metagame" and try everything they can to further enforce it instead of throwing stuff out there that has the possibility to completely break it. Yes, it would make the game more complicated and therefore sell less at first, but it would also make it more interesting to watch. Just comparing how many (somehow) working weird teamcomps I've seen in like 100ish DotA 2 games compared to how many different lol teamcomps (like the MOST someone can switch around without people flaming him to death is AP top vs AP bruiser. Or a ganky jungler vs a tanky one), I can't stop thinking that this is a pretty damn basic problem in riots design philosophy. =/ Edit: On January 17 2012 16:27 Craton wrote:
It's hard to balance champs when most of your internal team is low Elo. Elo, as something representing skill, doesn't even matter that much. It's a matter of being able to design well or not. Someone who designs a formula 1 car doesn't have to be able to drive it to it's max, but he has to be able to understand the thought- and actionprocesses that a driver would make.
While I am inclined to agree with you, I would like to make note of the fact that a lot of this potentially has to do more with the comparative infancy and closed-mindedness of the LoL community, particularly at the top levels. Particularly in the competitive DotA community, there's been much more experimentation and variation, and that inevitably trickles down to all levels of play. This also potentially has to do with the fact that competitive DotA is developed enough that players can spend a lot of their time exploring these variations, rather than just worrying about their fundamentals (whereas even some top-level competitive LoL players still have significant issues with fundamental decision-making and map awareness, like Doublelift). While you've made some good observations, inferring that they all stem from Riot's design philosophies might be jumping the gun.
|
Baa?21247 Posts
On January 17 2012 17:03 ihasaKAROT wrote:
So no Viktorbuff... what?
And the Vaynenerfs seem kinda odd to me. Its not the movementspeed that gets you killed, its her max W. Still thats untouched...
I think Viktor could potentially use some buffs, but there really shouldn't be a rush. He can hold his own in lane and isn't exactly bad at anything. He just doesn't excel at much...
I think Viktor is a really nice addition to AoE teams. That ult is massive damage, and he provides OK utility to the team in the form of a pretty good stun in addition to the instant silence. Following up another AoE initiator with his ult will silence the enemy and prevent escape, while doing huge AoE damage.
I really think Viktor is comparable to Brand right now, if not even a bit better :3 Neither are good, could use some "QoL" adjustments somewhere down the line, but no rush.
Also lasers are fun.
|
Only thing Viktor needs is Q to come back faster.
|
Personal opinions about patch
Ahri cd ult was needed
Riven was needed, too strong
Shaco box nerf, was kinda unnecessary. bye bye ap shaco 
Skarn was abit overnerfed imo. the mana increase is kinda huge. ult cd is meh...
Vayne, imo that was a huge nerf to her, tackling everything almost in her kit. shes prob still gona be a top tier pick
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Overbuffing underplayed champs makes perfect sense because once literally everyone starts playing them you get very precise statistics. Minor buffs don't help champs who are not being played much because you won't increase the playerbase for them and will have no idea of their actual power level unless someone good picks up the champion just for fun.
As for Vayne, I think they are consciously taking the decision to make her an AS-based tank melter instead of an autoattacking assassin, those tumble nerfs are huge. Still, sum up all her nerfs since release and you will get an idea of just how retardedly broken she was upon release.
I run oom with Graves all the time even now, I wonder if I will have to add some MP5 runes/masteries to play him after the patch goes live.
|
On January 17 2012 17:13 Leeoku wrote:Personal opinions about patch Ahri cd ult was needed Riven was needed, too strong Shaco box nerf, was kinda unnecessary. bye bye ap shaco Skarn was abit overnerfed imo. the mana increase is kinda huge. ult cd is meh... Vayne, imo that was a huge nerf to her, tackling everything almost in her kit. shes prob still gona be a top tier pick
I belief the Shaco boxnerf is aimed at not getting 2 buffs at the 2minutemark anymore. Wich is a good thing.
|
I kinda wonder if the "power creep" that people talk about isn't from more recent releases being straight-up stronger than older characters, but from more recent releases being more adapted to the metagame that has developed than older more general characters (Ashe vs modern AD's, where the purpose of the current ad is to farm up and deal as much damage as possible, while most of ashe's skills are wasted on utility).
Regarding the 'fixed metagame' - I think that riot tries to make sure that newer releases can fit into the current metagame so people will actually play them, and I think thats fine. I don't think its some conspiracy to enforce the metagame but rather riot reacting to what players are doing. Look at, say, Fizz or Talon - they do work inside the metagame but not cleanly. Fizz especially, they even classify him as a fighter/assassin rather than as a mage.
Also I think that the metagame doesn't evolve so much because the focus is solo queue, rather than team games - and that's a result of the player base more than anything riot is doing. In solo queue a 'standard' metagame works because then everyone knows what to expect and what is expected of them, which is required since its 5 strangers (usually).
This has gotten kinda long but I'm sick and tired of people harping about the 'static metagame' and of people getting pissy at riot for everything they do. The metagame exists for a reason - and if you look at tournaments its not nearly as fixed as people make it out to be.
As for criticisms of riot, yeah sometimes they're valid, but sometimes it feels to me like people are upset riot isn't staffed by weird amalgams of Socrates, da Vinci and Jesus. Perfect game design is hard, yo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
