EPTPress the random button on some RNG device.
Buff champs/skills/items that you get if they are not used, nerf if they are used.
???
Balance
[Patch 1.0.0.153: Preseason Balance Update 1] GD - Page 286
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
Press the random button on some RNG device. Buff champs/skills/items that you get if they are not used, nerf if they are used. ??? Balance | ||
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
 | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:10 TheYango wrote: I think "reset on kill" mechanics and manaless champions are my #1 and #2 for "ideas that seemed good at the time but ended up being bad for the game". The early ones imo actually were good. The 2010 Katarina and 2010 Garen imo were good with the no mana mechanism because their skills either had long cds or werent individually that good. After that though they just made some really stupid shit like Renekton or Vladimir which ended up causing mana having to not really matter anymore because otherwise mana champions couldn't keep up. Irelia was one of the first mana champions who didn't give a shit about mana IIRC. | ||
|
I_Love_Bacon
United States5765 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:14 TheYango wrote: In that case, we just have to accept that as a difference of opinion. I think the game passed the point where it was ready for a more hands-off approach to balance a LONG time ago. I think you're right. However, with the new changes in season 3 I think now they've got their hands full against trying to figure out what still has to be changed. During season 2 there was definitely a period I'd have loved for them to go dark. On January 05 2013 08:16 Kipsate wrote: A second banphase would be good for more variance in picks, it would also not hurt the casual base that only plays blind pick. Since there are so many champions there will always be those that stand above the rest, this is no different in Dota then it is in LoL. This has been a reoccuring topic that I think almost everybody on this subforum agrees with. More bans or a 2nd banning phase would be great for competitive play. I know I'd certainly love to see it instituted. | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
Since there are so many champions there will always be those that stand above the rest, this is no different in Dota then it is in LoL. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:16 I_Love_Bacon wrote: I think you're right. However, with the new changes in season 3 I think now they've got their hands full against trying to figure out what still has to be changed. During season 2 there was definitely a period I'd have loved for them to go dark. This has been a reoccuring topic that I think almost everybody on this subforum agrees with. More bans or a 2nd banning phase would be great for competitive play. See that's the thing--more sweeping changes means longer before players properly figure them out, which in turn means the more counterproductive your efforts to tweak the game before everything settles down are likely to be. Having a stable game state means that your player base figures things out quickly, and infrequent changes encourages more innovation. You're actually probably more likely to reach a balanced state more quickly in the long run, even if the game is slightly less balanced in the short term. Making changes way faster than people can adjust muddles peoples' efforts to properly get a handle on the state of the game, and discourages/disincentivizes people from revealing "hidden OPs" due to fear of them getting nerfed. | ||
|
thenexusp
United States3721 Posts
| ||
|
I_Love_Bacon
United States5765 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:20 TheYango wrote: See that's the thing--more sweeping changes means longer before players properly figure them out, which in turn means the more counterproductive your efforts to tweak the game before everything settles down are likely to be. Having a stable game state means that your player base figures things out quickly, and infrequent changes encourages more innovation. You're actually probably more likely to reach a balanced state more quickly in the long run, even if the game is slightly less balanced in the short term. I'm in general agreement on that. My only concern is that given the short time that season 3 has been here, there are certainly some changes that still have be worked out. Probably not many, but I imagine in about a month I'd be very content to see Riot put its hands in its pockets and avoid buffs/nerfs for a while. I'd love to see how the game shifts w/o nerfs/buffs as to what champions become FotM then counters are discovered against. As it stands now, they do take too active a roll in buffs/nerfs and it means people just wait for the nerfbat to come instead of finding ways to deal with certain champions. On January 05 2013 08:24 thenexusp wrote: Seriously guys, quoting posts that occur in the future is really starting to freak me out. Time travel bro - get with it. | ||
|
kainzero
United States5211 Posts
On January 05 2013 06:51 obesechicken13 wrote: Please don't remove the things I quoted since they add context and just lead to people saying what was in the quoted excerpt. Yeah. Those numbers looked closer. It's warrunner of 6.76 that had a crazy win rate. https://dotabuff.com/heroes/winning?date=patch_6.76 6.76 lasted all of 4 days before being replaced with 6.76c. definitely not enough time for anyone to figure out counters to centaur or drow, and centaur got nerfed pretty hard in 6.76c, even moreso in the current patch of 6.77. (i usually remove things because nested quotes confuse me, lol. noted.) | ||
|
Lylat
France8575 Posts
On January 05 2075 08:24 thenexusp wrote: Seriously guys, quoting posts that occur in the future is really starting to freak me out. Really ?? | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Suppose you had a hypothetically "perfectly balanced" game. This in turn means that there are a vast multitude of styles that are equally viable, encompassing all the heroes in equal proportion. It would mean that the picking is driven purely by playstyles and preferences, and not by certain champions being inherently stronger. In this state, the teams that are the best at the game would gravitate to their own personal playstyles. Because they are the best teams, they would do well with them. Lesser teams, by nature, try to replicate the success of stronger teams, and so they tend to copy the playstyles of the stronger teams. This in turn skews the way people pick to be centered around those playstyles. Even though other playstyles are equally viable, the fact that teams are copy from the best skews picking priority toward champions that are good with and against those types of strategies. Even this "perfectly balanced" game would create the perception of FotMs in the short term. As such, watching perceived balance in the short term isn't very useful. Since we can't easily disjoint a team's "success" from their "skill", you likewise cannot discern whether a team is performing well because they play the OP champs, or if the champs appear OP because they pick them. It's only useful to evaluate balance from viewing long-term trends, and it is potentially counterproductive to do otherwise. | ||
|
LazyFailKid
Canada750 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:26 kainzero wrote: 6.76 lasted all of 4 days before being replaced with 6.76c. definitely not enough time for anyone to figure out counters to centaur or drow, and centaur got nerfed pretty hard in 6.76c, even moreso in the current patch of 6.77. (i usually remove things because nested quotes confuse me, lol. noted.) Drow had 24/7 global split push with almost no items and centaur ult was like a free kill for your team every 65 seconds because of how godlike global max speed haste with a nuke that scaled into the lategame and on top of that it provided retarded initiation and counter initiation. It falls into pre-nerf BC catagory | ||
|
BlueSpace
Germany2182 Posts
On January 05 2013 08:16 Kipsate wrote: A second banphase would be good for more variance in picks, it would also not hurt the casual base that only plays blind pick. Since there are so many champions there will always be those that stand above the rest, this is no different in Dota then it is in LoL. Actually Riot design was asked about this and they don't want to have a second ban phase. They actually want to have even less bans if possible in order to allow players to be able to show off their signature champions. Whether it is really possible to do this while having something like a varied strategy and diverse champions is to be seen, but I wouldn't hold my breath for a second ban phase any time soon. There was a thread about it not so long ago, don't remember who of the riot design team was answering the question and where. Also I can't find the thread anymore, but maybe somebody else still knows how to find it. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Personally I didn't like Zileas' reasoning at all. | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
| ||
|
Doctorbeat
Netherlands13241 Posts
On January 05 2013 09:07 TheYango wrote: http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=28994941#28994941 Personally I didn't like Zileas' reasoning at all. He glosses over the entire reason why you would want it. Which is the huge amount of strategic depth that you gain from champ select, plus the ability to negate certain strategies without giving it away before the other team even has to pick. Just played some DotA2, csing feels so easy in LoL now, haha. Stupid laggy animations. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
Now I'm doing decently with him midgame or so, but I've started losing every single lane as him. Oh well, maybe I'll get it some day About that 4ban post by Zileas, the main question in my mind is: "Since when is Sivir Doublelift's signature champion?" Oh and also, it's funny because his entire reasoning gets countered by the first 2 bans, then 3 bans after 3 picks system that dota has | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On January 05 2013 09:16 Shikyo wrote: Hmm... Apparently after ult enchant Khaz feels sort of "tanky" in teamfights, I mean I didn't really build any tank items but I survived pretty well when I EWQRd in and ran away in ulti. Seems like the 40% reduction is more significant than I thought. Now I'm doing decently with him midgame or so, but I've started losing every single lane as him. Oh well, maybe I'll get it some day About that 4ban post by Zileas, the main question in my mind is: "Since when is Sivir Doublelift's signature champion?" I think he was just giving an example albeit a bad one | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
LiquidStripes streaming Durr's team vs. Dednakai Gaming. Sadly, I can't restream cuz I'm still home D= | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
His entire basis for not believing that interwoven bans add strategic depth is the idea that nonstandard strategies have a harder time dealing with a second ban phase than standard ones, when it's the opposite. If you are drafting a non-standard strategy, it is very possible to draft "defensively" in a way that your first 3 picks do not give away what you are trying to do. In fact, this is fairly standard in DotA, even if you are NOT playing a non-standard strategy. It is unfortunately not possible to draft around counterpicks like this in the current system. If your opponent is last pick (or you are last pick but your first 4 picks reveal your strategy), you effectively have no recourse to prevent the opponent from counter-picking your strategy's weakness unless the strategy allows you to pick it yourself (unlikely, as, like Zileas says, typically non-standard strategies are less flexible and cannot shoehorn picks in this manner). You are essentially forced into accepting the opponent's ability to counterpick you. Whereas with a second banning phase, you could PRE-EMPTIVELY ban those heroes the enemy could counterpick you with, based on the knowledge of the remaining roles you have left to pick. Essentially a rudimentary knowledge of how drafting in DotA and LoL work allows you to draw the totally opposite conclusion from Zileas when it comes to how non-standard strategies and overall strategic depth are affected by interwoven bans. | ||
| ||
