[Patch 1.0.0.134: Nautilus] General Discussion - Page 177

On February 29 2012 08:36 Unentschieden wrote:
They shouldn´t reduce prices it just makes people rage because: they already bought them and/or the reduction isn´t big enough. Totally.

On February 29 2012 04:41 Mogwai wrote:

rumble's really not that bad. I really used to hate that fucker, but seriously, you can trade favorably with him with Wu and Irelia and he just generally seems to get ruined by competent ranged tops.

around the same time I got over rumble, I got over Kennen. it actually doesn't seem that hard to trade well against him so long as you don't eat damage from the neutral position for no reason.

vlad's an asshat, but is pretty weak vs. burst laners with the capability to sustain burst cycles that put meaningful damage on him and 100->0 combo laners. he is bullshit in all lanes if he gets to level 9 + WotA without falling behind, but so long as you're not trying to play GP vs. him or something it doesn't feel that bad.

On February 29 2012 07:58 bmn wrote:


I disagree with this, I enjoy the diversity of hero types. I think that the core mechanics of only having mana-based heroes is stupid and limiting.
Cooldown-based heroes shift the penalties from long-term sustain (running out of mana) to short-term vulnerable periods (cooldowns). I enjoy the diversity in play styles, and I don't see why you think the latter require little decision-making. If anything, I find the single-resource style (all heroes use mana) bland and less interesting WRT decision-making, since it's always the same equation, just with slightly different constants.

If the cooldown-based heroes are too strong/abusive, that's a balance problem, but there's nothing in the mechanic that makes that necessary -- although it's certainly harder to balance around multiple resource types than it is with just mana-based heroes.

I think what makes Rumble and Riven annoying is that they also have good escaping skills, so they can spam, hurt, you, and get out of range if you don't have a gap closer. If Rumble's shield didn't speed him up, he'd have to be a lot more careful about choosing when to harrass.
Yorick is annoying because he isn't very vulnerable if he misses a W, the ghoul is still there and he still benefits from his passive. Apart from mana costs, he isn't penalized for missing skill shots/timings, and his cooldowns are very low as well.

On February 29 2012 09:17 Craton wrote:

They should actually reduce at a meaningful rate and amount. They reduce at like 1% the rate/amount they add new 6300 champs.

On February 29 2012 09:37 arnath wrote:

Two points:

1) I'd argue that very few of the resourceless champions have anything approaching "long cooldowns". For example, compare Irelia vs Riven. Irelia's cooldowns are just as long if not longer but she also has to deal with her mana pool.

2) Maybe this is the DotA player in me speaking but I personally don't think that you should be able to stay in lane forever. Harassment should have some sort of lasting effect and cost or else it has no point. You're not making trades, you're just mildly inconveniencing each other for the next 5 seconds.

On February 29 2012 09:37 arnath wrote:
2) Maybe this is the DotA player in me speaking but I personally don't think that you should be able to stay in lane forever. Harassment should have some sort of lasting effect and cost or else it has no point. You're not making trades, you're just mildly inconveniencing each other for the next 5 seconds.

On February 29 2012 09:17 Craton wrote:

They should actually reduce at a meaningful rate and amount. They reduce at like 1% the rate/amount they add new 6300 champs.

On February 29 2012 09:49 TheYango wrote:

DotA really has no relevance to this discussion, because there is no proper analogy to this sort of lane sustain problem due to the courier. In DotA, ANY laner can stay in lane forever. You should literally never have to go home because you can always courier yourself a salve and a clarity (which costs 15 gold more than a TP) or refill your bottle instead of walking home to fountain. The only time you should ever have to physically go back to the fountain is if you're so low on both HP and mana that even the salve+clarity won't cover your needs (e.g. you survived a gank with like 50 hp left).

This is a problem that's very much unique to LoL.

On February 29 2012 10:29 Jaso wrote:


Really can't be complaining about Riot's prices. The game is free...
If you want to buy champs faster, get RP.

The purpose is to reward players who play a lot or are willing to spend money, considering RP is Riot's only major source of income.

On February 29 2012 09:42 Unentschieden wrote:


Realitycheck: why? As consumer it´s rational to demand lower prices but for Riot raising the total "IP value" of the game makes sense since they don´t want us to ever run out of stuff to buy.

On February 29 2012 11:31 overt wrote:


As long as they release new runes every year and release new champions every two weeks we will never run out of things to buy. Reducing the IP cost on champions that are 6 months old or something like that could yield them a ton of nice PR and honestly who cares if people bitch about having paid for the champion at full price months ago. People bitch about high costs already so either way Riot is gonna have people bitching at them.

On February 29 2012 11:46 Zdrastochye wrote:


So why reduce them as such? You admit they're in a lose-lose, and as they are now they're very slowly stepping down IP costs on old champs. There's no PR necessary, they're doing what you're describing just by a less amount. I own all but 6 champions on my main, and play enough to keep that number relatively down, but having 3 smurf level 30s I probably only own 15-20 on each of those, and when I hit 6.3k on them I'll just buy a new champ.

On February 29 2012 12:07 HazMat wrote:
Lol Chaox just said TSM's gaming house address on stream. 2strong.

On February 29 2012 12:09 JBright wrote:


I thought it's been known for a while. People have sent them pizza and red bull.