|
On January 11 2013 07:36 phyvo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 07:22 Sufficiency wrote:On January 11 2013 06:51 phyvo wrote:On January 11 2013 06:28 jcarlsoniv wrote:On January 11 2013 06:25 Sufficiency wrote:
Fire starter is never wrong, except I think in Generation 3? Fire type is good by itself, and it's usually very hard to get good non-starter fire types.
This is especially true after the physical/special split that turned Flameon into garbage. I was never into all the theory behind Pokemon comps cuz I was too young when I played it a lot, and I haven't bought any of the recent ones. I know there's allll sorts of shit to think about when designing your team and leveling up your pokemon that I just have no clue about. In every pokemon game I ever played I had two criterion for my team: (a) that no team member be the same type as any other (b) my team should look SWEET, no ugly stupid pokemon on my team By ruby it was getting hard to fill out my team with pokemon I actually liked, but I managed it.. Recently I tried to play black/white (or was it diamond/pearl? I don't even know anymore), but I just lost interest 1/4th of the way through because all the pokemon were dull and I wasn't interested in catching them. Honestly the last "pokemon" game to grip me was Pokemon Mystery Dungeon. I look forward to someone pokerapping the LoL champion list though when we hit 150. Actually, all you need are 3 real pokemon to beat the game. I usually go with fire (starter), water, and electric. After the game is beaten I start gathering and breeding semi-legendaries and other strong pokemon (either because they have high att/speed as a sweeper or has good defense/utility as a wall) so I can beat the battle tower. My point kinda was that efficiency had little or nothing to do with my pokemon experience. I always had a team of 6 with my starter roughly 2 levels ahead of the rest of my team and I never bothered with "battle towers". Variety and coolness were more important than anything else, and if I were to play again still would be.
I remember just brute forcing battle tower with 3 of my strongest pokemon. Back then I didn't know or really care about stats, so I just took my starter+2x level 100's and going ham, occasionally using a TM to grab a skill for one of the annoying pokemon that came out(like the blissy which you'd hit it with a fighting move and then afk for 2 minutes while it dies). I don't remember if I actually beat it.
|
LoL: Pokemon general discussion
All I want from pokemon X/Y is for the fire starter not to evolve into a fire/fighting again.
|
On January 11 2013 07:37 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 06:56 Seuss wrote:On January 11 2013 06:22 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 01:27 Seuss wrote:On January 10 2013 17:02 TheYango wrote:
I do think the sieging ability of a ranged carry is a significant factor.
At this point, the game doesn't really have a safe alternative to that for pushing high ground towers (split-pushing base towers is inherently slow, risky, and not what I'd call safe). This is especially the case insofar as LoL, unlike DotA, does not have casters that can siege towers well, nor does it have many sieging items that help a team's creep wave push the high ground (though the potential of Banner in this type of situation is worth exploring), or allow a melee to siege like a ranged carry does (Manta Style).
There is a LOT of merit in the fact that a ranged carry allows you to safely end a game without having to resort to diving or exposing yourself to 4v5s. I would agree it's a significant factor, but I think there are a number of champions who can work around that issue without needing to be or build like an AD carry. Jayce, Nidalee, Elise, and Kayle are four who stand out. All four can be played in various lanes/roles depending on the needs of your team composition, and all four can have the damage and range to siege turrets without having to build like an AD carry. They may not fit into every team composition, but they can fulfill the same sieging role. There are also plenty of AP champions who have the attack range to do some sieging. Anivia, Annie, Ziggs, Zilean, and Zyra all have attack ranges of 575 or more, and have plenty to bring to a siege, to a teamfight, or both. Another 10 AP champions (excluding Elise) have 550 range. With either Lich Bane or simply lots of AP they can still poke down towers. They may not be as good at taking towers as AD carries, but you will still be able to whittle down a tower without committing to a dive. This is all really just the tip of the iceberg, as team composition theory is a complicated and labyrinthine subject. However, I think it's fairly clear that there are ways around having an AD carry which don't involve split-pushing, diving, or taking every single baron/dragon while the enemy team sits in their trenches. The point is, though, you cannot just say, "Well we have no AD, the Assassin is worse." Because that is not true he just kills your AP Carry then and you have no teamfight engage. Or it become an AD Assassin-off where whoever gets the full combo in is the victor. Its like playing vs. a Twisted Fate that had a Magical 100% Lichbane uptime. I would argue it isn't as simple as "the enemy assassin kills your AP". For one, at least half the possible AP options can build fairly tanky while still accruing significant AP and burst potential. At the same time, it's a heck of a lot easier to protect one vulnerable champion than it is two or three. To top it all off, APs typically have a lot of burst themselves, so if the assassin fails to kill the AP instantly they're at risk. It's not as cut and dry, either way, as you might think. This is why I said it's a labyrinthine subject. We're talking on a fairly theoretical level, so it's easy to throw assertions onto the table because there's a definitive lack of hard data to use in support of or against an argument. This is practically philosophy. That is good, if your AP is an assassin Character, but what if its a Cassio or Anivia, more sustained casters? It is a given that burst damage is better than sustained damage. If someone is disputing that, then we have a plethora of problems. So burst needs to be discounted, and it is, usually, except for certain characters, right now. Moreover, if the enemy team, having 1 champ, requires your entire team to be tankier, that is an unbalance situation. If just because the emeny has Khazix, my Mid has to start: Cata>Rod>Chainvest>Zhonyas, and my AD has to go Dorans>Dorans>BT>GA/Warmogs then that is not a good situation.
I think you're veering off course a bit here (a dead end in the labyrinth). The scenario we're considering at the moment is replacing the AD carry with something else, and relying either on your AP carry or that replacement for pushing towers. The team as a whole isn't building tankier, except insofar as replacing an AD carry with a bruiser or tank makes the team tankier, and insofar as AP champions tend to be slightly harder to kill than AD carries due to their high base damage (burst or sustained) and dual-purpose itemization (e.g. Zhonya's).
The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way.
|
On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:
If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way.
You start talking about a dire situation, but your conclusion almost makes me think it'd be a good thing.
|
To be clear, I don't think the situation is so dire that you can't reasonably expect to protect one champion from being dove (especially if that champion isn't a squishy AD carry). It just seemed to be the direction in which cLutZ was going.
|
On January 11 2013 08:28 Seuss wrote:
To be clear, I don't think the situation is so dire that you can't reasonably expect to protect one champion from being dove (especially if that champion isn't a squishy AD carry). It just seemed to be the direction in which cLutZ was going.
Well the point really is if you need to dedicate more than 2-3 people (including the protected person) to do that, and the person you are "protecting" isn't Vayne or Kog, or Maybe a Glass Cannon Cassio/Karthus, you lose anyways.
I think it is perfectly possible to protect an AD Carry from assassins, my point is that the investment in doing that is too great, because you are countering 1 character, who doesn't have a very long build up time, with basically a team.
|
On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 07:37 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 06:56 Seuss wrote:On January 11 2013 06:22 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 01:27 Seuss wrote:On January 10 2013 17:02 TheYango wrote:
I do think the sieging ability of a ranged carry is a significant factor.
At this point, the game doesn't really have a safe alternative to that for pushing high ground towers (split-pushing base towers is inherently slow, risky, and not what I'd call safe). This is especially the case insofar as LoL, unlike DotA, does not have casters that can siege towers well, nor does it have many sieging items that help a team's creep wave push the high ground (though the potential of Banner in this type of situation is worth exploring), or allow a melee to siege like a ranged carry does (Manta Style).
There is a LOT of merit in the fact that a ranged carry allows you to safely end a game without having to resort to diving or exposing yourself to 4v5s. I would agree it's a significant factor, but I think there are a number of champions who can work around that issue without needing to be or build like an AD carry. Jayce, Nidalee, Elise, and Kayle are four who stand out. All four can be played in various lanes/roles depending on the needs of your team composition, and all four can have the damage and range to siege turrets without having to build like an AD carry. They may not fit into every team composition, but they can fulfill the same sieging role. There are also plenty of AP champions who have the attack range to do some sieging. Anivia, Annie, Ziggs, Zilean, and Zyra all have attack ranges of 575 or more, and have plenty to bring to a siege, to a teamfight, or both. Another 10 AP champions (excluding Elise) have 550 range. With either Lich Bane or simply lots of AP they can still poke down towers. They may not be as good at taking towers as AD carries, but you will still be able to whittle down a tower without committing to a dive. This is all really just the tip of the iceberg, as team composition theory is a complicated and labyrinthine subject. However, I think it's fairly clear that there are ways around having an AD carry which don't involve split-pushing, diving, or taking every single baron/dragon while the enemy team sits in their trenches. The point is, though, you cannot just say, "Well we have no AD, the Assassin is worse." Because that is not true he just kills your AP Carry then and you have no teamfight engage. Or it become an AD Assassin-off where whoever gets the full combo in is the victor. Its like playing vs. a Twisted Fate that had a Magical 100% Lichbane uptime. I would argue it isn't as simple as "the enemy assassin kills your AP". For one, at least half the possible AP options can build fairly tanky while still accruing significant AP and burst potential. At the same time, it's a heck of a lot easier to protect one vulnerable champion than it is two or three. To top it all off, APs typically have a lot of burst themselves, so if the assassin fails to kill the AP instantly they're at risk. It's not as cut and dry, either way, as you might think. This is why I said it's a labyrinthine subject. We're talking on a fairly theoretical level, so it's easy to throw assertions onto the table because there's a definitive lack of hard data to use in support of or against an argument. This is practically philosophy. That is good, if your AP is an assassin Character, but what if its a Cassio or Anivia, more sustained casters? It is a given that burst damage is better than sustained damage. If someone is disputing that, then we have a plethora of problems. So burst needs to be discounted, and it is, usually, except for certain characters, right now. Moreover, if the enemy team, having 1 champ, requires your entire team to be tankier, that is an unbalance situation. If just because the emeny has Khazix, my Mid has to start: Cata>Rod>Chainvest>Zhonyas, and my AD has to go Dorans>Dorans>BT>GA/Warmogs then that is not a good situation. I think you're veering off course a bit here (a dead end in the labyrinth). The scenario we're considering at the moment is replacing the AD carry with something else, and relying either on your AP carry or that replacement for pushing towers. The team as a whole isn't building tankier, except insofar as replacing an AD carry with a bruiser or tank makes the team tankier, and insofar as AP champions tend to be slightly harder to kill than AD carries due to their high base damage (burst or sustained) and dual-purpose itemization (e.g. Zhonya's). The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way.
A serious problem with not running an ADC is that you will have a lot of difficulty against an all-bruiser comp. It's really hard to win against a comp with Mundo + Olaf even if you have Cass + Anivia.
|
United States47024 Posts
On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:
The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way.
The thing is, I don't think it is that dire.
It IS possible for a ranged carry to itemize in such a way that they can duel an assassin that dives them, in a reasonable manner. The inherent superiority of melee champion kits (which I think is a pretty suspect idea to begin with--the only disparity is Riot releasing OP champs) is not so much as to overcome a significant item advantage, which a ranged carry maintains due to being the highest farm priority on a team. A ranged carry with a minor farm advantage can duel an assassin, provided they do not choose to totally neglect their defensive stats. This was proven yesterday in SWL. GodJJ with LW+Thirster+Giant's Belt didn't have any trouble dueling Reapered's Warmog's+Cleaver Kha'zix. In fact, he 1v1ed him to death with basically no help. All it took is having slightly higher farm priority and an investment into defensive stats by the 3rd major item.
The truth about S1 and S2 is that people CHOSE not to itemize in such a self-sufficient way. People chose deliberately to itemize as a glass cannon who is vulnerable to being dived and insta-killed because the quality of peeling was high enough, and the damage dealing/diving ability of an anti-carry was low enough that a ranged carry player could get away with that.
In some ways, this can be likened to carry itemization in DotA. DotA carry itemization DEMANDS self-sufficiency because of the existence of BKB--any diving hero, for a moderate investment, can make himself unpeelable. The onus is on the carry to itemize in a way that makes himself self-sufficient in the face of such threats. We're reaching the same sort of state in LoL (albeit it is a product of several other awkward factors). And it IS possible in LoL for a ranged carry to itemize to be self-sufficient.
Incidentally, when 2009 played LoL casually, he remarked on this as being one of the differences in carry play between the two games. He said something to the effect of "In DotA, if you are Drow, and a Blademail Bloodseeker dives you in a fight, you turn on your BKB and you fight him like a man. But in LoL, if you are in an equivalent situation, you just kite and run." We're simply just reaching another point of similarity where carries have to be able to man-fight anti-carries, and not just run.
|
On January 11 2013 08:53 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:
The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way. The thing is, I don't think it is that dire. It IS possible for a ranged carry to itemize in such a way that they can duel an assassin that dives them, in a reasonable manner. The inherent superiority of melee champion kits (which I think is a pretty suspect idea to begin with--the only disparity is Riot releasing OP champs) is not so much as to overcome a significant item advantage, which a ranged carry maintains due to being the highest farm priority on a team. A ranged carry with a minor farm advantage can duel an assassin, provided they do not choose to totally neglect their defensive stats. This was proven yesterday in SWL. GodJJ with LW+Thirster+Giant's Belt didn't have any trouble dueling Reapered's Warmog's+Cleaver Kha'zix. In fact, he 1v1ed him to death with basically no help. All it took is having slightly higher farm priority and an investment into defensive stats by the 3rd major item. The truth about S1 and S2 is that people CHOSE not to itemize in such a self-sufficient way. People chose deliberately to itemize as a glass cannon who is vulnerable to being dived and insta-killed because the quality of peeling was high enough, and the damage dealing/diving ability of an anti-carry was low enough that a ranged carry player could get away with that. In some ways, this can be likened to carry itemization in DotA. DotA carry itemization DEMANDS self-sufficiency because of the existence of BKB--any diving hero, for a moderate investment, can make himself unpeelable. The onus is on the carry to itemize in a way that makes himself self-sufficient in the face of such threats. We're reaching the same sort of state in LoL (albeit it is a product of several other awkward factors). And it IS possible in LoL for a ranged carry to itemize to be self-sufficient. Incidentally, when 2009 played LoL casually, he remarked on this as being one of the differences in carry play between the two games. He said something to the effect of "In DotA, if you are Drow, and a Blademail Bloodseeker dives you in a fight, you turn on your BKB and you fight him like a man. But in LoL, if you are in an equivalent situation, you just kite and run." We're simply just reaching another point of similarity where carries have to be able to man-fight anti-carries, and not just run.
TLDR: DotA carries are for manly men; LoL carries are pussies.
|
my team has been runing a setup like this when evelyn is available. we run evelyn taric bot irealia mid jax top and cho jungle or somthing similar, havent lost a game yet. although we are very low elo (~1100)
|
On January 11 2013 08:59 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:53 TheYango wrote:On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:
The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way. The thing is, I don't think it is that dire. It IS possible for a ranged carry to itemize in such a way that they can duel an assassin that dives them, in a reasonable manner. The inherent superiority of melee champion kits (which I think is a pretty suspect idea to begin with--the only disparity is Riot releasing OP champs) is not so much as to overcome a significant item advantage, which a ranged carry maintains due to being the highest farm priority on a team. A ranged carry with a minor farm advantage can duel an assassin, provided they do not choose to totally neglect their defensive stats. This was proven yesterday in SWL. GodJJ with LW+Thirster+Giant's Belt didn't have any trouble dueling Reapered's Warmog's+Cleaver Kha'zix. In fact, he 1v1ed him to death with basically no help. All it took is having slightly higher farm priority and an investment into defensive stats by the 3rd major item. The truth about S1 and S2 is that people CHOSE not to itemize in such a self-sufficient way. People chose deliberately to itemize as a glass cannon who is vulnerable to being dived and insta-killed because the quality of peeling was high enough, and the damage dealing/diving ability of an anti-carry was low enough that a ranged carry player could get away with that. In some ways, this can be likened to carry itemization in DotA. DotA carry itemization DEMANDS self-sufficiency because of the existence of BKB--any diving hero, for a moderate investment, can make himself unpeelable. The onus is on the carry to itemize in a way that makes himself self-sufficient in the face of such threats. We're reaching the same sort of state in LoL (albeit it is a product of several other awkward factors). And it IS possible in LoL for a ranged carry to itemize to be self-sufficient. Incidentally, when 2009 played LoL casually, he remarked on this as being one of the differences in carry play between the two games. He said something to the effect of "In DotA, if you are Drow, and a Blademail Bloodseeker dives you in a fight, you turn on your BKB and you fight him like a man. But in LoL, if you are in an equivalent situation, you just kite and run." We're simply just reaching another point of similarity where carries have to be able to man-fight anti-carries, and not just run. TLDR: DotA carries are for manly men; LoL carries are pussies.
Well obviously, have you ever talked to jcc/GGod?
|
the opposition has a payer named viktor playing viktor mid wtf !
|
|
|
On January 11 2013 08:42 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:28 Seuss wrote:
To be clear, I don't think the situation is so dire that you can't reasonably expect to protect one champion from being dove (especially if that champion isn't a squishy AD carry). It just seemed to be the direction in which cLutZ was going. Well the point really is if you need to dedicate more than 2-3 people (including the protected person) to do that, and the person you are "protecting" isn't Vayne or Kog, or Maybe a Glass Cannon Cassio/Karthus, you lose anyways. I think it is perfectly possible to protect an AD Carry from assassins, my point is that the investment in doing that is too great, because you are countering 1 character, who doesn't have a very long build up time, with basically a team.
My point, relative to yours, is that the investment required to protect an AP is not as great as that of an AD carry. Most APs have a relatively short build up time, have much smoother itemization for building semi-tanky (compared to AD carries), and are generally more self-sufficient than AD carries. Add to this that your team has one less person to worry about getting assassinated (the AD carry who was dropped for a bruiser or assassin of your own) and that one character isn't being countered by the team inasmuch as they no longer counter the team.
If I'm wrong on that point then I'm correct to say that running lots of bruisers would be better, as echoed by Sufficiency. If I'm right then we can continue down the labyrinth of theory and start wondering if it's really as hard to fight a bruiser team without an AD as Sufficiency says.
On January 11 2013 08:53 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:11 Seuss wrote:
The pressing question is whether this strategy is effective enough at pushing towers to be a compelling alternative to running an AD carry. If this idea isn't effective as a result of assassins being so deadly that we can't reasonably expect even a coordinated team to protect one person long enough to deal with the threat, then things are far worse than either TheYango or I considered and everyone should break out four bruisers + Karma and win games that way. + Show Spoiler +The thing is, I don't think it is that dire.
It IS possible for a ranged carry to itemize in such a way that they can duel an assassin that dives them, in a reasonable manner. The inherent superiority of melee champion kits (which I think is a pretty suspect idea to begin with--the only disparity is Riot releasing OP champs) is not so much as to overcome a significant item advantage, which a ranged carry maintains due to being the highest farm priority on a team. A ranged carry with a minor farm advantage can duel an assassin, provided they do not choose to totally neglect their defensive stats. This was proven yesterday in SWL. GodJJ with LW+Thirster+Giant's Belt didn't have any trouble dueling Reapered's Warmog's+Cleaver Kha'zix. In fact, he 1v1ed him to death with basically no help. All it took is having slightly higher farm priority and an investment into defensive stats by the 3rd major item.
The truth about S1 and S2 is that people CHOSE not to itemize in such a self-sufficient way. People chose deliberately to itemize as a glass cannon who is vulnerable to being dived and insta-killed because the quality of peeling was high enough, and the damage dealing/diving ability of an anti-carry was low enough that a ranged carry player could get away with that.
In some ways, this can be likened to carry itemization in DotA. DotA carry itemization DEMANDS self-sufficiency because of the existence of BKB--any diving hero, for a moderate investment, can make himself unpeelable. The onus is on the carry to itemize in a way that makes himself self-sufficient in the face of such threats. We're reaching the same sort of state in LoL (albeit it is a product of several other awkward factors). And it IS possible in LoL for a ranged carry to itemize to be self-sufficient.
Incidentally, when 2009 played LoL casually, he remarked on this as being one of the differences in carry play between the two games. He said something to the effect of "In DotA, if you are Drow, and a Blademail Bloodseeker dives you in a fight, you turn on your BKB and you fight him like a man. But in LoL, if you are in an equivalent situation, you just kite and run." We're simply just reaching another point of similarity where carries have to be able to man-fight anti-carries, and not just run.
I don't think the current situation is so dire as to completely eliminate AD carries. Team composition theory is way, way too complicated for that to be the case given the current state of balance. I do, however, think that Season 3 and the necessity for AD carries to focus more on survivability has given us a lot more wiggle room for trying out what previously would have been off the wall team compositions.
On another note, my experience in ARAMs meshes pretty well with your theories. I've beaten quite a few assassins and bruisers by building mixed items (depending on the AD I ended up with) rather than pure damage. Being able to survive a Rengar's initial burst without having to panic and having the breathing room to kite him thereafter without worrying that a single misstep will spell doom is nice.
|
On January 11 2013 08:59 Ryuu314 wrote:TLDR: DotA carries are for manly men; LoL carries are pussies.
that's what happens when you take the term "carry" and you put it in another game where the meaning completely changes.
i'd say jax/irelia would probably fit into the old definition.
FINALLY HEART SEEKER VAYNE ON SALE
|
I should just send my thoughts and a cheque to Yango whenever I have an idea to express here, he's more or less making the same point as myself yesterday and he does it in 2k characters instead of 10k. :<
On January 11 2013 08:53 TheYango wrote:
This was proven yesterday in SWL. GodJJ with LW+Thirster+Giant's Belt didn't have any trouble dueling Reapered's Warmog's+Cleaver Kha'zix. In fact, he 1v1ed him to death with basically no help. All it took is having slightly higher farm priority and an investment into defensive stats by the 3rd major item.
Which champ was GodJJ playing? I like the idea behind his build—he didn't go for pure dps/kiting with a PD, his build seems tailored against doing damage after surviving a bruiser/assassin dive: Belt gives him the HP buffer to survive the burst while BT combines damage (for his main role as the AD carry) with lifesteal to sustain against the follow-up, and LW lets him defend against divers who itemized armor to outlast him.
Krepo just finished a normal game on a smurf (~180-90 W/L record, I don't know what kind of normal Elo that gives), first picking Veigar and having a Zed sent against him. He got a double as the jungler dove him at level 2 (exhaust summoner + stun in tower range allowed him to survive then finish off the two) and used it to buy a tear, so no apparent huge advantage here, and he kept on losing trades whenever they happened.
He then bought a chainvest that he made into a Zhonya as soon as possible, farming passively (he got some assists through counterganks and died a bit), and completed Archangel's after that, spamming his spells as soon as he was out of lane/his tear started being charged so he could get the shield from Seraph's Embrace.
In fights, he didn't have the AP/penetration necessary to 100-0 anybody but the support (since Zed had no AP, and HP from BC; maybe he could have 100-0'd the Vlad too, but pool) so he usually killed the support if given the chance, and supported the other members of his team's focus otherwise. But he was able to survive being dived/initiated on by Zed or Xin by combining his stun, zhonya and seraph's, so his team could counter engage the divers and he'd live. Even when he died, it took a serious commitment from the divers (and they usually got cleaned-up afterward). He also positioned so that it was easier to engage on him than on the other squishy of the team, Caitlyn (and he had his own stun to protect him).
Of course, it was a normal (he didn't carry nor anything and his team won despite having the top and the jungler dc'd 2+ minutes early on) and at the competitive level the passiveness with which he farmed would be heavily punished, but I found it interesting after the discussions here since he rushed survivability and utility (on top of his damage since as Seuss pointed out AP itemization allows it) and played the "I won't hurt as much, but I'll live so at least I'll have a damage output" approach.
Life gonna suck for picks like Ashe who can't peel for themselves/fight head-on until pretty late, though. Mobility creep striking again.
Another thing: despite what we're saying here, and how it sucks for carries, and they're nerfed, and shit... actually, the more we discuss it, the more I like it. Not because I suck at AD and especially playing glass cannon, but because what we're expressing as a worry can also be interpreted as an opportunity: if AD aren't as good, or can't build full glass cannon like before, then they aren't the ultimate answer to the tower-killing, damage-dealing issue. So we can start exploring other stuff without being bitten as hard as before for it.
If it widens the possibilities, if it shakes the meta, if it allows crazy stuff... then whatever, let's have the carries fear for their lives and feel a bit miserable as a bruiser would previously feel going against a 6 items Tristana. We've got a huge toy box to explore.
|
Literally 0 skins or champs that I want.
|
Morgana's and Swain's skins are really good, and on two of my favorite champs. But since I spent my leftover RP during the previous big sale I can't have them without paying some more now. Uh. I guess I'll pass. :<
|
United States47024 Posts
Life gonna suck for picks like Ashe who can't peel for themselves/fight head-on until pretty late, though. Mobility creep striking again.
I'd say this sucks more for Ashe because of how low her inherent damage is without going all-out offensive itemization.
The change inherently is more awkward for ADs that relied on that 4th offensive item lategame. Carries with high inherent damage (both the midgame ones with high ability damage like Ezzy/Graves/Corki, and the lategame ones with high steroid damage like Kog/Trist/Vayne) are better off than carries that really depended on their itemized damage.
|
On January 11 2013 09:47 Requizen wrote:
Literally 0 skins or champs that I want.
Love pretty much every skin there barring the Fizz one. Probably going to pick up the Sona, Swain and Panth ones and possibly a few others if my credit card finger gets twitchy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
