|
On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options.
That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. .
|
On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options.
While I agree with you that balance should be aimed at higher level play, it's relatively rare that Riot actively balances for exclusively low level play. The last bout of nerfs that pre-rework Xin got is the only example I can think of where something gets nerfed that really isn't quite strong in high level play.
Lee is one of the most contested champs in OGN right now, Amumu's ult is the definition of "press R win teamfight" and is also the only "Snare" that also blocks autoattacking but not spellcasting, but its much bigger than pretty much all other AOE instant/nearinstant CCs. (I'm not counting things like Nami or Zyra ultis which are very avoidable after the ulti cast goes out)
|
On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. .
dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them.
|
United States23745 Posts
On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them.
LoL is way more casual than Starcraft...
Edit: And by that I mean way more casual fans to alienate.
|
On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them.
Which starcraft?
|
United States47024 Posts
On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them.
Starcraft never intentionally alienated its casual fans. There was no clear distinction back in 1998.
On January 05 2013 06:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Lee is one of the most contested champs in OGN right now, Amumu's ult is the definition of "press R win teamfight" and is also the only "Snare" that also blocks autoattacking but not spellcasting, but its much bigger than pretty much all other AOE instant/nearinstant CCs. (I'm not counting things like Nami or Zyra ultis which are very avoidable after the ulti cast goes out)
It's absolutely laughable to think that play right now is indicative of the state of balance for this patch at ANY level.
Even at the top level, one month is not long enough for the dust to settle on what's OP. Especially when the patch is as thoroughly game-changing as this one.
|
On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them.
There was no competitive Starcraft when they did balance patches.......
|
To be honest, no BW didn't subsist entirely because of its hardcore players. BW subsisted entirely on its hardcore population as far as competitive 1v1 was concerned, sure, but casual players were satiated by a strong custom map scene. Also the SC/BW marketing model didn't actively desire or care if players stopped playing after purchasing the game.
Also, as far as balancing the pro scene, Kespa balanced the pro scene with mapmaking.
On January 05 2013 06:13 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them. Starcraft never intentionally alienated its casual fans. There was no clear distinction back in 1998. Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Lee is one of the most contested champs in OGN right now, Amumu's ult is the definition of "press R win teamfight" and is also the only "Snare" that also blocks autoattacking but not spellcasting, but its much bigger than pretty much all other AOE instant/nearinstant CCs. (I'm not counting things like Nami or Zyra ultis which are very avoidable after the ulti cast goes out) It's absolutely laughable to think that play right now is indicative of the state of balance for this patch at ANY level. Even at the top level, one month is not long enough for the dust to settle on what's OP. Especially when the patch is as thoroughly game-changing as this one.
I don't really disagree Yango - I don't like how little Riot is willing to "let the dust settle" right after a change as gargantuan as the S3 changes. Fix the massively broken shit like Black Cleaver, but don't go fucking around with Talon, Lee, etc etc until things have evened out a bit. It's still preseason even!
|
On January 05 2013 02:56 VayneAuthority wrote:
if you want to abuse op stuff that doesn't get nerfed you have to do research yourself and find a champ under the radar thats hard to play. A good example right now is hecarim, blatanly really strong right now but barely anyone plays him and he's only been getting buffed recently.
sure it is hard to use lee sin to his full potential, but it is not hard to do well with him, seen by his huge popularity and his amazing kda across the boards.
same with amumu, super easy to play and highest winrate zz. these are the kind of champs that get nerfed.
I'm starting a project of doing some videos of what I feel is super OP and should be abused in Solo Q while you can, with little tips for better play. Unfortunately I'm a little late but I'm starting with Khazix. Next will probably be AP Yi.
|
On January 05 2013 06:15 Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them. There was no competitive Starcraft when they did balance patches.......
there wasnt any competitive LoL until recently. Didn't stop them from making balance changes before that they only took advice from the best players. Same with starcraft, they made a game as balanced as they could to foster a competitive game. I hope that LoL goes in the same direction (which they have for the most part) and caters specifically to making the game as balanced as possible for the best players.
also sup chrispy how you been
|
United States47024 Posts
As a concept, balancing for casual/hardcore didn't even become a relevant concept until well after BW stopped getting balanced. The concept of "casual gaming" didn't even exist yet. There were just gamers, and there was just balance.
|
On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
that's kind of the point of why i put it there
|
IMO, an exception to the rule (SCBW) doesn't make it's path the gold standard rule to follow, especially if they were introduced in different generations. If your game is too unbalanced at the lowest levels, those people will never care enough or get to the level of wanting to admire exceptional play. They will most likely quit after a short period of time generally, and with that your general player base will eventually extinguish. The worse the balance/game, the faster that rate of decline, generally. Exceptions will always happen, but it doesn't mean that it should be the norm.
|
On January 05 2013 06:21 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:15 Diamond wrote:On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them. There was no competitive Starcraft when they did balance patches....... there wasnt any competitive LoL until recently. Didn't stop them from making balance changes before that they only took advice from the best players. Same with starcraft, they made a game as balanced as they could to foster a competitive game. I hope that LoL goes in the same direction (which they have for the most part) and caters specifically to making the game as balanced as possible for the best players. also sup chrispy how you been
I don't follow your logic at all. You seem to be arguing your own point?
|
Balance for low skill tiers doesn't matter so much as long as the difficulty curve is not too steep. You want a high skill ceiling with an easy, gradual skill curve. Idealistically, capitalism functions this way and it is one of the most competitive economic models.
Easy to learn, hard to master, with perks at the top end to give incentive enough to climb the ladder.
|
On January 05 2013 06:26 Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:21 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:15 Diamond wrote:On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them. There was no competitive Starcraft when they did balance patches....... there wasnt any competitive LoL until recently. Didn't stop them from making balance changes before that they only took advice from the best players. Same with starcraft, they made a game as balanced as they could to foster a competitive game. I hope that LoL goes in the same direction (which they have for the most part) and caters specifically to making the game as balanced as possible for the best players. also sup chrispy how you been I don't follow your logic at all. You seem to be arguing your own point?
Don't really have a point, I guess my bottom line is that if we leave this up to the casuals, we will have darius nerfed, an already mediocre/middle of the line champion and other things of the sort. Obviously not that great for the game.
|
On January 05 2013 06:21 Chrispy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 02:56 VayneAuthority wrote:
if you want to abuse op stuff that doesn't get nerfed you have to do research yourself and find a champ under the radar thats hard to play. A good example right now is hecarim, blatanly really strong right now but barely anyone plays him and he's only been getting buffed recently.
sure it is hard to use lee sin to his full potential, but it is not hard to do well with him, seen by his huge popularity and his amazing kda across the boards.
same with amumu, super easy to play and highest winrate zz. these are the kind of champs that get nerfed. I'm starting a project of doing some videos of what I feel is super OP and should be abused in Solo Q while you can, with little tips for better play. Unfortunately I'm a little late but I'm starting with Khazix. Next will probably be AP Yi.
LOL welcome to 3 patches ago
|
from mass gaming solo queue recently, i feel like khazix solo, eve jungle, and to a lesser extent, panth, and to an even lesser extent, ezreal, are the blatant OPs right now in solo queue.
|
On January 05 2013 06:27 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:26 Diamond wrote:On January 05 2013 06:21 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:15 Diamond wrote:On January 05 2013 06:10 VayneAuthority wrote:On January 05 2013 06:03 nojitosunrise wrote:On January 05 2013 05:53 Phunkapotamus wrote:On January 05 2013 05:52 TheYango wrote:On January 05 2013 05:51 Phunkapotamus wrote:
These lists are bullshit though.
From Lolking: "Percentages are based on weekly data sets, all regions and leagues."
Invoker is super low on the dota list because scrubs can't press buttons. However, we all know he's extremely strong in high level play.
I know riot cares about low elo, but TL sure doesn't, and shouldn't.
I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire to. Invoker's not even that good in high level play anymore after his most recent nerfs lol. Good situationally, but have to pick him into good matchups, otherwise he gets crushed. Ah, then I'm outdated with Dota2. My point still stands from my edited post, so I'll put it here: I do not believe balancing for low denominations is a wise strategy. You should balance for (relatively) higher level play. This gives low levels something to admire and aspire towards- without diminishing higher level options. That mindset doesn't work. If you alienate your casual playerbase, your game will die. . dont agree, starcraft took this approach and it lasted FOREVER. Computer games tend to be played by pretty hardcore people that want to play hard games, alienating your casual playerbase is hard when they will be playing people just as bad as them. There was no competitive Starcraft when they did balance patches....... there wasnt any competitive LoL until recently. Didn't stop them from making balance changes before that they only took advice from the best players. Same with starcraft, they made a game as balanced as they could to foster a competitive game. I hope that LoL goes in the same direction (which they have for the most part) and caters specifically to making the game as balanced as possible for the best players. also sup chrispy how you been I don't follow your logic at all. You seem to be arguing your own point? Don't really have a point, I guess my bottom line is that if we leave this up to the casuals, we will have darius nerfed, an already mediocre/middle of the line champion and other things of the sort. Obviously not that great for the game.
It's pretty obvious they aren't ONLY going for casuals just off the recent champions alone. Kha'Zix, Jayce, Orianna, Elise, Zed, and others are all INCREDIBLY deep champions that a casual player can play with, but a pro player will make look just absurd.
Can a casual track 2 shadows plus Zed in a teamfight? Hell no. Can a high level player? Yes.
The problem with Lee Sin I think is he just got too much stuff in top lane. I started recently making him my main go to for top lane, and I am AWFUL with him. Yet I still have yet to lose my lane, despite being outplayed almost every game. He wins trades vs anyone, does not have mana, has insane sustain built in his kit, and is likely the most mobile champ in the game.
Even aside for low level, almost every pro stream/tournament I watch these days Lee Sin is either perm banned, or first pick like every time. I think he's one of the most picked/banned at OGN also (thought I saw that on Reddit somewhere). He is good on ALL levels even if you miss 80% of your Q's.
Seems like you are letting emotion get in your way here and not going off facts. Facts are that he has one of the most versatile kits while having no true weakness. He has sustain, mobility, free armor (atm), a slow, the kick, an execute, and more. If every champ was as badass as Lee Sin would that be cool? Sure. But it will take time, although it very much seems to the the direction Riot is going these days, away from the newbie champs and into the more diverse and deep champs. And maybe when the day comes that the only champs being played are the newer/deeper champs then Lee can get put back in line, but atm he's sooooooo far ahead of other champs that I see no problems with small nerfs like this. Hell he could have got the boot like Diana where they nerf EVERYTHING (that I don't agree with), they just tweaked some stuff that will force you to play smarter.
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On January 05 2013 06:38 zulu_nation8 wrote:
from mass gaming solo queue recently, i feel like khazix solo, eve jungle, and to a lesser extent, panth, and to an even lesser extent, ezreal, are the blatant OPs right now in solo queue.
How do you jungle eve? Like the way Dan does?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
