EPT[Patch 1.0.0.136: Lulu] General Discussion - Page 15
| Forum Index > LoL General |
Remember guys, this is the general discussion thread. Keep whine/QQ posts in the appropriate QQ memorial thread! Thanks! | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
| ||
|
nojitosunrise
United States6188 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:01 57 Corvette wrote: His mana problems were never in lane, its when you are in the middle of a 20-30 second long teamfight and you run oom after 10 seconds because of your ulti. Swain changes incoming http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=22262467#post22262467 | ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:02 Alaric wrote: Does "untargetable" mean that you can't be actively targeted (ie if you're surrounded w/o allies, allied minions or monsters nearby the AI will still try to hit you) or that no targeted stuff can hit you at all? Also, does stuff like burnout, non-targeted, ground-based AoE still damage you? Yar, aoe still hits you. And I belive that minions will check for you, not see you since you are untargettable, then find another target. | ||
|
triplej
United States47 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:05 Two_DoWn wrote: Yar, aoe still hits you. And I belive that minions will check for you, not see you since you are untargettable, then find another target. Are you sure? I feel like I miss kills on Vladimir (as Viktor) because he just pools out of my ult or my pew pew lazor. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:01 Two_DoWn wrote: As for the cloth->chain vest: I feel as though it is the game trying to set up incentives and rewards for saving up as much gold as possible. For example, you dont feel happy coming home with 500 gold and being able to only buy a cloth armor if you are laning against a wukong. But if you can survive long enough to get to 800 gold and can get a chain vest, the reward for being able to do that is much greater and you feel more awesome for being able to actually play out your skill and be rewarded for it. Consequently, this incentives/rewards system is kind of snowbally by nature, because it means the guy that is already winning is more likely to get those "rewards" of getting big items, where the guy who's behind has to compromise and get poorer items. If you make smaller items cost-effective enough, then it means that you create interesting counterplay opportunities, where the player/team that's behind can go all-in on smaller items and try and fight their way back into the game with more gold-efficient items during the appropriate timing window. The cost of this is that if they miss that timing, they'll really start losing ground once they cap out on items. | ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
| ||
|
nojitosunrise
United States6188 Posts
| ||
|
ToT)OjKa(
Korea (South)2437 Posts
| ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:09 TheYango wrote: Consequently, this incentives/rewards system is kind of snowbally by nature, because it means the guy that is already winning is more likely to get those "rewards" of getting big items, where the guy who's behind has to compromise and get poorer items. Which isnt a bad thing: you want to reward skill. How much would it suck to be 5-1 and barely stronger than someone who is 1-5? And even then, because of the way the cost structure works, those big items are REALLY expensive. 5-1 may be good enough for a NLR, but it probably wont be enough of a difference for a Dcap. | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:09 TheYango wrote: Consequently, this incentives/rewards system is kind of snowbally by nature, because it means the guy that is already winning is more likely to get those "rewards" of getting big items, where the guy who's behind has to compromise and get poorer items. If you make smaller items cost-effective enough, then it means that you create interesting counterplay opportunities, where the player/team that's behind can go all-in on smaller items and try and fight their way back into the game with more gold-efficient items during the appropriate timing window. The cost of this is that if they miss that timing, they'll really start losing ground once they cap out on items. isn't that kinda how dblades work already? they are super cost effective aside from not building into anything. | ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:13 Two_DoWn wrote: How much would it suck to be 5-1 and barely stronger than someone who is 1-5? It's the equivalent to timing play in Starcraft. The guy who loses 1 fight doesn't slowly get closed out of the game. He has the opportunity to execute an all-in or timing attack when the opponent tries to leverage his army advantage to try and expand or tech. More cost-efficient small/mid-tier items is the equivalent--you allow the opportunity for a team that's behind to go all-in on gold-efficient, but slot-inefficient items and, with proper execution and timing sense, play their way back into the game. On March 21 2012 04:16 Two_DoWn wrote: Slush brings up a good point as well. We do have items that work that way. But the general goal has been to push people toward finishing items, not stacking a bunch of mediocre items just because they are cost effective. You and Smash seem too focused on this extreme, when the reality is that most of the mid-tier items never get bought. Have you ever seen a team that's behind finish items like Brutalizer, (pre-remake) Hexdrinker, or Haunting Guise and try to force fights at specific timings? No, because the gain isn't worth it the cost on those items. | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
you can take my opinion with a grain of salt if you like, I'll be honest with you, I want NO part of comeback mechanics in LoL | ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:18 TheYango wrote: It's the equivalent to timing play in Starcraft. The guy who loses 1 fight doesn't slowly get closed out of the game. He has the opportunity to execute an all-in or timing attack when the opponent tries to leverage his army advantage to try and expand or tech. More cost-efficient small/mid-tier items is the equivalent--you allow the opportunity for a team that's behind to go all-in on gold-efficient, but slot-inefficient items and, with proper execution and timing sense, play their way back into the game. Best way I can put it: Do you think the snowball meta exists? If no, you are trying to fix something that isnt broken. If yes, this isnt an itemization question. | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21243 Posts
On March 21 2012 03:54 TheYango wrote: Perhaps Moonbear or someone else could shed light on this, but I don't see the reasoning behind bigger items being more cost-effective than (or hell, even comparably cost-effective to) their smaller, early game counterparts. "Slots taken" is in essence a resource in and of itself, and it seems silly to me that higher slot-efficiency shouldn't come with a tradeoff in gold efficiency. Slot efficiency is, in my view, less of an issue in LoL than DotA. At the top level, games tend to be decided relatively early, when people have at most 2 big items finished with a few doran items/boots added in, with advantages gained in teamfights during that stage just rippling out to effectively end the game right there. So there's really no "incentive" to build bigger items if they didn't come with increased gold efficiency, since slot efficiency is rarely a limiting factor, at least compared to DotA. This all comes with lack of buyback and the comparatively smaller map where one-two midgame fights really does decide the game in so many cases. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:21 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Slot efficiency is, in my view, less of an issue in LoL than DotA. At the top level, games tend to be decided relatively early, when people have at most 2 big items finished with a few doran items/boots added in, with advantages gained in teamfights during that stage just rippling out to effectively end the game right there. So there's really no "incentive" to build bigger items if they didn't come with increased gold efficiency, since slot efficiency is rarely a limiting factor, at least compared to DotA. This all comes with lack of buyback and the comparatively smaller map where one-two midgame fights really does decide the game in so many cases. That's the exact problem that I feel more cost-efficient basic and mid-tier items would address. You can argue that part of the reason games end so quickly is because the team that gets ahead gets to finish their big items sooner, and the team that's behind often has very little recourse other than to finish the same items, but later. There's not that much room for them to choose to go all-in on cheaper items. It's not the only way to address it, and it might not have that big of an effect, but it has comparatively few negative tradeoffs with regard to creating bad gameplay in other aspects of the game. Like, I don't see what's BAD about making those mid-tier items that nobody buys more cost-effective, and allowing them to be leveraged as a means for a team that's behind to exploit timings. As another plus, it would make support itemization a little less awkward if buying baseline resist/HP items were more cost-effective and didn't feel as shitty. | ||
|
Kaniol
Poland5551 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:11 nojitosunrise wrote: LoL is pretty popular https://twitter.com/#!/truffle/status/182180778271191040 Additionally, his attack frame will be getting an update so he has an easier time last hitting early on in the game. WTF how can you make probably the easiest ranged autoattack animation even easier? :O | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
| ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
On March 21 2012 04:24 Slusher wrote: Somewhere Ryze is crying Ryze animation is just perfect :o The one which still bugs me after 10+ games is Kennen. This projectile is soooooo slow ! | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
| ||
| ||
