|
On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters. Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 11:33 Two_DoWn wrote:
It isnt unique that roles have to optimize both defensive and offensive stats. ADC and AP carries have always gone for the best mix possible, just enough defense to live.
The thing ATM is that the scale got tipped a bit in favor of going heavier defense to adjust to S3 itemization and penetration. ADC have benefited just as much as assassins have from the changes on the offensive side, they just need to adjust a bit defensively.
This isnt unique to LoL. Even Anti Mage in Dota, perhaps the hardest carry there is, grabs a Heart and a butterfly.
The idea that the most efficient build is whatever kills the enemy team the fastest is complete and utter bullshit. The most efficient build is the one that lets you and your teammates kill every member of the opponent team with you ending the fight on 1 hp. Ahh, thanks for bringing up Anti-mage. Does he perform well in the early game? mid game? No? Oh you mean he is a carry that is farm reliant? What would happen in DOTA if Antimage was super strong at say...level 6?
What is your Elo?
Because at this point the only thing that can really explain your hatred of assassins is an inability to actually recognize how to shut them down in a team environment.
|
I don't know where else to put this, but GGod/jcc if you stream in a panda suit i will watch for sure
ggod pls
|
On January 11 2013 12:08 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters. On January 11 2013 11:33 Two_DoWn wrote:
It isnt unique that roles have to optimize both defensive and offensive stats. ADC and AP carries have always gone for the best mix possible, just enough defense to live.
The thing ATM is that the scale got tipped a bit in favor of going heavier defense to adjust to S3 itemization and penetration. ADC have benefited just as much as assassins have from the changes on the offensive side, they just need to adjust a bit defensively.
This isnt unique to LoL. Even Anti Mage in Dota, perhaps the hardest carry there is, grabs a Heart and a butterfly.
The idea that the most efficient build is whatever kills the enemy team the fastest is complete and utter bullshit. The most efficient build is the one that lets you and your teammates kill every member of the opponent team with you ending the fight on 1 hp. Ahh, thanks for bringing up Anti-mage. Does he perform well in the early game? mid game? No? Oh you mean he is a carry that is farm reliant? What would happen in DOTA if Antimage was super strong at say...level 6? What is your Elo? Because at this point the only thing that can really explain your hatred of assassins is an inability to actually recognize how to shut them down in a team environment.
Yeah, like assassins aren't anything unspectacular new to lol. If you havn't been hitting someone running akali (at the very least) both mid and top you really havn't been playing much. The same concept of shutting her down can be applied to everyone else. At the end of the day what does taric and sona give you? 1 second stuns. what does lux and jarvan give you? hard cc that presents the target for your adc to kill. They can't be building much tank when their whole live is bursting down high value targets and then cleaning up from there.
If your team can't keep you alive anymore for you to just free dps things you need to solve this problem. You can't just whine about it or blame it on things that are out of your control.
|
I don't really think Assasins are overpowered at the moment. Maybe there's just something that they're doing wrong like not getting a specific item eg. SotD. Other than fed/farmed Rengar none of the assasins get something they can use to sneak up to you so there is opportunity for counterplay. They're definitely still not winning all my games.
|
On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:
Ahh, thanks for bringing up Anti-mage. Does he perform well in the early game? mid game? No? Oh you mean he is a carry that is farm reliant? What would happen in DOTA if Antimage was super strong at say...level 6?
AM performs pretty fucking well early/mid-game, considering how ridiculous he is with full farm. He's certainly a farcry from other carries that are even worse off until they get their build rolling. There are much better examples of DotA carries that are more power curve heavy on the end game(especially if you go back into the game's history).
Also, the assassins being talked about aren't nearly as scary late game as AM is, so it's a bogus comparison there as well. KZ and Zed more closely resemble DotA semi-carries that when having great games can appear to be almost pure carries. Those same characters end up showing just how ridiculous the pure carries are though when a game gets drawn out and an AM or Void is allowed to keep plugging away at their core items and upstages the full build semi-carry that WAS dominating.
|
I feel like I'm arguing with the people who are like "Why can't melle carries be more viable" then there are the people who are like, "Tryndamere could totally kill the other teams AD and AP" then I say, "Carries kill tanks not other carries" and get flamed.
Eve is being Nerfed, like I predicted, when I said, "Stealth is inherently unbalanced" they killed Rengar as well. Maybe the assassin tax is not as significant as the 50g/ward Eve tax, but maybe it is. But when someone says, "Maybe the meta means an AD carry isn't needed" (basically arguing for an RPS teamcomp strategy Tanky>Assassin>AD>Tanky) then I get accused of hating assassins. Heck at my elo (1450) it doesn't matter. It does affect how I enjoy watching streams though, and tournaments. Which is why I qq.
|
You dont need an AD carry.
AD carry, moreso than damage, is only in the comp because it enables you to fight in more locations (under both towers) as well as push towers much more easily.
In many situations adding a bruiser over an AD carry actually makes a team much more dangerous in many stages of the game. The problem is as the game gets longer and teams have more freedom in their chose of combat locations, then the utility of an AD carry really becomes important.
Similarly, an assassin likely WILL be straight up more powerful than an AD carry (1v1) for the majority of the game. That is how it is supposed to be. However, when you introduce full teamplay, competent teams deal with assassins quite easily.
As for why melee carries tend not to be as viable, in LoL farm is spread much more evenly over a team. Dota allows for certain characters to achieve much higher farm rates than other heroes because of the size of the map, as well as through different itemization paths and mechanics (illusions with radiance, bfury). If a Trynd or a Yi has the same farm advantage a PL or AM has in any given game of dota, then they can carry just as hard. The issue is that that farm advantage isnt naturally achievable in LoL without feeding.
|
The difference between am and an assassin is that am can't randomly instagib a hero whenever it wants
A closer feel to an assassin in the lol sense would be say tiny, who can instagib things and scales fairly well into the late game, but the differences here is that tiny doesn't have flash and another DMg+movement skill that lol assassins often do, as well as the fact that late game dps and burst aren't given by the same items, so it forces a choice instead of steady scaling in terms of both burst and dps
The main problem is that assassins are inherently Antifun in a game that needs to appeal to casuals. When there are champs that as a principle just randomly walks up to you and instagibs you without any danger to themselves while continuously scaling to be constantly able to do so, people are going to complain
|
On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters.
Oh please I asked you to stop with the goddamn Antimage thing. Antimage is a mix of Jax/Olaf's survivablity with Vayne's damage output and Katarina/Akali's (assuming they get resets). The guy is designed to 1v5 once farmed! Will your assassin do that? Nope. Sure, if his team helps him survive, deals damage so he just has to clean-up, etc. he'll do it. But if he gets focused, he'll die. Or GTFO at low health without damaging anyone apart from his original target.
+ Show Spoiler [non-concise example] +I just finished a game where a bruta-BT-warmogs Zed killed our Ezreal several times. Why? Well, for one, noone peeled for Ez (I'd have done it but as Irelia there's stuff I do better than help killing a warmogs wearing dude), and moreover Ez didn't build anything defensive until his GA. I don't know if he managed to survive when that happened, Zed killed him several times but apparently he needed more than his combo (which means "hey, if we cc this guy Ez will survive and lifesteal back to healthiness", and he'll even end up healthier if we cc during the combo). So if Ez had randuin's instead of GA, or warmogs? Ez would have survived. Dueled I don't know, but definitely survived.
When Zed killed him through our peels, he had invested almost 3k (about 40% of his money at the time) in that warmogs. Ez hadn't invested anything into defensive itemis. Then Zed bought GA.
(I'll admit that I was surprised to see Zed with 315 AD from just bruta, BT, masteries and quints.)
I was playing Irelia (you can check lolking on Armoric, fucking tanky build since AP Nid was fed as hell and they'd focus me most of the time, 2 to 3 damage dealers and Nami's cc), I killed most of them 1v1 at one point or the other but when they focused me in teamfights they'd kill me. Often without me killing my target. Was fine. We won several fights because I'd occupy 2 of them and Ezreal would survive either through peeling or GA active; had Ezreal built warmogs (or even a belt instead of BF after his GA) he could even have survived Zed's combo reliably while their glass-cannon champs would be zoned because too low from me, and Zed dead. We proceed to win the 4v3.
TL;DR: I wish I had recorded a replay, because bruta-BT-warmogs Zed was a first and I'm really curious to know how it fared when trying to dive Ezreal, pre and post GA.
Also when Zed killed through peels and lived, he had invested more than half his money in defensive itemization. That's almost bruiser more than assassin here.
+ Show Spoiler [Passive mids example] +Karthus can lane without fighting an assassin. You can accomodate picks around that (hell, people lane swapped just to give a safe laning phase to Vayne or Kog).
About passive mids getting assassinated in the river, well, 3 things:
- they're passive because they don't go in the river, be it for invades or for roaming, anyway.
- if they went, even in s2, they would get ambushed by champs like Annie or Ahri, so they'd die all the same, and it wouldn't be "assassinated".
- if an assassin can 100-0 somebody, even a popular roaming mid like Ahri or Diana would get assassinated in the river then.
Put assassins out of the picture. Passive mids aren't loved currently because the meta makes them weak at the competitive level. They don't have what is currently required (map presence, potential for pressure). It's not a particular example, it doesn't have to do with other roles specifically. If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same.
TL;DR: Passive mids didn't fit s2 competitive meta (sorry Jiji). If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. You can blame assassins for being able to kill glass-cannon, I can blame squishies for not fitting the meta. Do you blame Malzahar because his roaming is vulnerable or do you blame Ahri because she ambushes and kills him?
If AD carries have to be tankier (without going BT->warmogs->randuin's I mean, of course that'd be a concern), how is it a problem?
Of course the full glass-cannon build doesn't work as well anymore. But then, if your carries build boots/BT/PD/LW/GA/warmogs they're still the pinacle of dps. They're still kings at killing towers (shush Nidalee and Jayce). It's just that the pinacle of dps has lowered. It doesn't make AD carries non-viable, though. And they still truck bruisers for 200+ dps while being ranged.
You know, it's been awhile since AP carries don't 100-0 stuff anymore, past midgame. Burst mages with such potential have been nerfed (hi Gragas, hey Eve). Did we say "oh AP carries can't burst down targets anymore, they're useless and non-viable"? Nop. Meta evolved. We moved toward sustained damage, we moved toward utility, we moved toward map pressure. But we moved away from full damage. We adapted.
|
On January 11 2013 11:10 MoonBear wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 10:54 Seuss wrote:On January 11 2013 10:43 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 10:33 TheYango wrote:On January 11 2013 10:27 cLutZ wrote:
Ahh yes, but your solution, is actually just another indication of the problem: The AD Carry had to build inefficient AD Carry items: BT and LW for that duel.
The point is not that Assassins make AD carry's obsolete, or can always 100-0 people, its that it forces such significant interactions that are unfavorable: It limits the AD Carries the other team can pick, it limits the Mids they can pick, it forces everyone on the other team to build 1 additional tank item.
Like I said, you win in every scenario:
1. They dont build tank, they dont peel: You kill Priority 1/2 targets.
2. They don't build tank, they peel. You have exhausted the other teams CC, rest of your team can clean up, or you get a kill anyways sometimes. Plus if you have BC you spread significant armor shred before you died.
3. They build tank. They have significantly gimped damage. Your AD is much stronger (IE/PD/LW vs. BT/LW/GA etc).
Its like the Eve problem: She nullifies sightstone (the best support item) and even ignoring that costs the enemy team like 50+gold per lane every 3 minutes. The disparity here is that you're treating "AD carry" as a core role that a team must have and "Assassin" as an optional role. Neither is any more or less required than the other. So you're treating the fact that a team that has a an AD carry and an Assassin can beat one that has an AD carry but no Assassin as an imbalance, when there is none. Either you consider them both core roles and the AD Carry+Assassin teamcomp is just a better, more well-rounded teamcomp and deserves to win, or you treat neither as core roles, and you have to evaluate the interaction between AD Carry-less comps and these comps to properly judge them. The Ad-Carry-less comp loses to the assassin+ADC comp because no 1 on the 4 bruiser team can kill the Udyr/Mundo/Olaf/Taric/Cho/ETC on the other side. You need a character with multiplicative scaling, Ranged AD Autoattackers are the safest position for that, and its only Fair/Balanced if the mutiplicative scaling comes out of Autoattacks or some other sustained damage, because burst is always better than sustained damage, given similar values. IDK why you are arguing in favor of lane bullies with midgame-dominant strategies not being irrelevant later on. You don't need a character with multiplicative scaling to kill bruisers. It's one way to do it, but just as there isn't one way to push a tower there isn't one way to beat a bruiser. I feel like we're walking through the history of the LoL meta as a part of this conversation. From the day we arrive in the League... and blinking, step into the lane. There's more to ward than can ever be seen. More to gank than can ever be ganked! There's far too much to take in here. More OPs than can ever be found. But the server delays, and the smurfs with big plays, keeps great and small making endless throws! It's the League of Legends! And it moves us all, through rage and hope, through ganks and jukes. Till we find our place on the lane unwinding - In the League, the League of Legends~*
That was pretty amazing O_O nice job!
Edit: holy dam you guys, what are you even arguing about anymore ?_?
|
On January 11 2013 12:58 Kupon3ss wrote:
The difference between am and an assassin is that am can't randomly instagib a hero whenever it wants
A closer feel to an assassin in the lol sense would be say tiny, who can instagib things and scales fairly well into the late game, but the differences here is that tiny doesn't have flash and another DMg+movement skill that lol assassins often do, as well as the fact that late game dps and burst aren't given by the same items, so it forces a choice instead of steady scaling in terms of both burst and dps
The main problem is that assassins are inherently Antifun in a game that needs to appeal to casuals. When there are champs that as a principle just randomly walks up to you and instagibs you without any danger to themselves while continuously scaling to be constantly able to do so, people are going to complain
Its not quite that bad due because of an assassin's lack of teamfight utility.
However, this gets to be a bit wonky because most new players (and the majority of experienced players really) dont fully understand how to teamfight, build, etc. So you end up with a scenario like a DT rush from BW, balanced for higher level players, but absolutely devastating to new ones.
|
That's my point, it's Antifun so casuals are going to qq no matter how good it is in comp play and riot will make changes based on that
|
I don't know why people are talking about antimage. His kit is designed to allow him to free farm in complete saftey until he becomes unkillable and can kill everyone with enough farm.
|
On January 11 2013 12:59 Alaric wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters. Oh please I asked you to stop with the goddamn Antimage thing. Antimage is a mix of Jax/Olaf's survivablity with Vayne's damage output and Katarina/Akali's (assuming they get resets). The guy is designed to 1v5 once farmed! Will your assassin do that? Nope. Sure, if his team helps him survive, deals damage so he just has to clean-up, etc. he'll do it. But if he gets focused, he'll die. Or GTFO at low health without damaging anyone apart from his original target. + Show Spoiler [non-concise example] +I just finished a game where a bruta-BT-warmogs Zed killed our Ezreal several times. Why? Well, for one, noone peeled for Ez (I'd have done it but as Irelia there's stuff I do better than help killing a warmogs wearing dude), and moreover Ez didn't build anything defensive until his GA. I don't know if he managed to survive when that happened, Zed killed him several times but apparently he needed more than his combo (which means "hey, if we cc this guy Ez will survive and lifesteal back to healthiness", and he'll even end up healthier if we cc during the combo). So if Ez had randuin's instead of GA, or warmogs? Ez would have survived. Dueled I don't know, but definitely survived.
When Zed killed him through our peels, he had invested almost 3k (about 40% of his money at the time) in that warmogs. Ez hadn't invested anything into defensive itemis. Then Zed bought GA.
(I'll admit that I was surprised to see Zed with 315 AD from just bruta, BT, masteries and quints.)
I was playing Irelia (you can check lolking on Armoric, fucking tanky build since AP Nid was fed as hell and they'd focus me most of the time, 2 to 3 damage dealers and Nami's cc), I killed most of them 1v1 at one point or the other but when they focused me in teamfights they'd kill me. Often without me killing my target. Was fine. We won several fights because I'd occupy 2 of them and Ezreal would survive either through peeling or GA active; had Ezreal built warmogs (or even a belt instead of BF after his GA) he could even have survived Zed's combo reliably while their glass-cannon champs would be zoned because too low from me, and Zed dead. We proceed to win the 4v3. TL;DR: I wish I had recorded a replay, because bruta-BT-warmogs Zed was a first and I'm really curious to know how it fared when trying to dive Ezreal, pre and post GA. Also when Zed killed through peels and lived, he had invested more than half his money in defensive itemization. That's almost bruiser more than assassin here. + Show Spoiler [Passive mids example] +Karthus can lane without fighting an assassin. You can accomodate picks around that (hell, people lane swapped just to give a safe laning phase to Vayne or Kog).
About passive mids getting assassinated in the river, well, 3 things:
- they're passive because they don't go in the river, be it for invades or for roaming, anyway.
- if they went, even in s2, they would get ambushed by champs like Annie or Ahri, so they'd die all the same, and it wouldn't be "assassinated".
- if an assassin can 100-0 somebody, even a popular roaming mid like Ahri or Diana would get assassinated in the river then.
Put assassins out of the picture. Passive mids aren't loved currently because the meta makes them weak at the competitive level. They don't have what is currently required (map presence, potential for pressure). It's not a particular example, it doesn't have to do with other roles specifically. If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. TL;DR: Passive mids didn't fit s2 competitive meta (sorry Jiji). If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. You can blame assassins for being able to kill glass-cannon, I can blame squishies for not fitting the meta. Do you blame Malzahar because his roaming is vulnerable or do you blame Ahri because she ambushes and kills him? If AD carries have to be tankier (without going BT->warmogs->randuin's I mean, of course that'd be a concern), how is it a problem? Of course the full glass-cannon build doesn't work as well anymore. But then, if your carries build boots/BT/PD/LW/GA/warmogs they're still the pinacle of dps. They're still kings at killing towers (shush Nidalee and Jayce). It's just that the pinacle of dps has lowered. It doesn't make AD carries non-viable, though. And they still truck bruisers for 200+ dps while being ranged. You know, it's been awhile since AP carries don't 100-0 stuff anymore, past midgame. Burst mages with such potential have been nerfed (hi Gragas, hey Eve). Did we say "oh AP carries can't burst down targets anymore, they're useless and non-viable"? Nop. Meta evolved. We moved toward sustained damage, we moved toward utility, we moved toward map pressure. But we moved away from full damage. We adapted.
Then why not just do the same for AD Assassins?
Isn't that what I have been arguing for all along?
|
Well that's likely going to happen because riot acts quite quickly based on community opinon most of the time and then many of the 100-0 based -assassins won't be used anymore because they lack the utility of aps in many cases
|
On January 11 2013 13:02 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 12:58 Kupon3ss wrote:
The difference between am and an assassin is that am can't randomly instagib a hero whenever it wants
A closer feel to an assassin in the lol sense would be say tiny, who can instagib things and scales fairly well into the late game, but the differences here is that tiny doesn't have flash and another DMg+movement skill that lol assassins often do, as well as the fact that late game dps and burst aren't given by the same items, so it forces a choice instead of steady scaling in terms of both burst and dps
The main problem is that assassins are inherently Antifun in a game that needs to appeal to casuals. When there are champs that as a principle just randomly walks up to you and instagibs you without any danger to themselves while continuously scaling to be constantly able to do so, people are going to complain
Its not quite that bad due because of an assassin's lack of teamfight utility. However, this gets to be a bit wonky because most new players (and the majority of experienced players really) dont fully understand how to teamfight, build, etc. So you end up with a scenario like a DT rush from BW, balanced for higher level players, but absolutely devastating to new ones.
DT rushes in BW were actually quite hard to pull off. Protoss were easier than Terran in my experience in BW but there were many who found the passive nature of flash turtle Terran easier than Toss. Also after enough games on iccup, players would get to their correct elo so none of that mattered. If you got to C- with DT rushes because DT rushes are hard to deal with, and you had horrid mechanics, you'd still only win 50% of your games.
Starcraft also only had 3 races to pick from whereas LoL has hundreds of champions.
How to build: no one knows how to build. I just watched a stream with IWD and Bischu where the enemy team comp had 5 AD champions, a Tristana with Botrk, and a Cait with Shiv. Everyone kept getting caught. When there's disagreement among the top players as to what to do, and what to build, it's safe to say that no one knows what's optimal.
Can we take all the DotA comparison talk and push it over to the DotA section? It's not relevant at all as both games are different enough that each comparison has at least 20 confounding asterisks next to it. Many of us also haven't played DotA.
Half the stuff in this game is unfun and the other half someone else would find unfun.
|
On January 11 2013 12:58 Kupon3ss wrote:
The difference between am and an assassin is that am can't randomly instagib a hero whenever it wants
The main problem is that assassins are inherently Antifun in a game that needs to appeal to casuals. When there are champs that as a principle just randomly walks up to you and instagibs you without any danger to themselves while continuously scaling to be constantly able to do so, people are going to complain
I like Talon. I find it fun to use his combo, and kill somebody.
What I like the most is, when played mid and especially against a long-ranged mage, the feeling of outplaying when you finally get in E range and you get to unload your combo on him while he can't just cc you and walk away, or Flash. Because you silenced him.
+ Show Spoiler [Rest of old/new rant] +Pantheon wouldn't get his whole HSS on a fleeing enemy if he didn't stun said enemy first.
Imagine Jax Leap Striking on a target without using Counterstrike first. Woops, Caitlyn used her net and now you're all sad and you can't hit her. The same would happen to Talon if he had no silence on his E. He wouldn't get his combo off.
On the other hand, he doesn't kill you in the blink of an eye. There is a slight wind down on his E. W has a travel time and has to come back. Same with his ult, even moreso if you want to use it to escape and so don't trigger the second part right away.
There is counterplay because during this time, you can use all kind of stuff to interrupt him. I had a great game where I would loath Cho'Gath (because fuck Cho'Gath really, I find he makes games really boring but whatever) who is sitting in front of his team. So I would try to flank them and jump on Draven after the teamfight was engaged by one side. At the start it worked well, but after 3 fights Lulu started sitting close to him, and she'd ult him, or polymorphs me during my combo.
Draven gets to live! But it also means his team has to fight 3v4 while he defends against me with Lulu.
I get to kill Draven 1v1. Doing my assassin's job. But in situations of bigger fights, I'm not as useful. I am exposed to counterplay. I don't "randomly instagib a champion whenever I want", I don't "randomly walks up to you and instagib you without any danger to myself".
TL;DR: I have already pointed it out a lot, but it has more to do with power creep and kits' issues than with assassins in general.
"Old school" assassins need some time to kill you (Pantheon, Akali, Talon, pre-rework Katarina who was more reliant on her ult so had to get at least 2 seconds out of it to get a solo kill), and often rely on multiple gap closer or cc to keep you from escaping by yourself, giving them the edge in 1v1s but making them weaker in teamfights where you can get help.
Newers ones (Rengar, Zed, Kha'Zix, Eve) can burst you down much faster (admittedly thanks to stealth removing the awareness and gap closing aspects, for some) and have better sustained damage, so they're both stronger and less opened to counterplay.
I don't really like it (and I don't really like them either, for the most part), but I see this as a problem inherent to the design process of champions, rather than an assassin problem in general.
On January 11 2013 13:08 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 12:59 Alaric wrote:On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters. Oh please I asked you to stop with the goddamn Antimage thing. Antimage is a mix of Jax/Olaf's survivablity with Vayne's damage output and Katarina/Akali's (assuming they get resets). The guy is designed to 1v5 once farmed! Will your assassin do that? Nope. Sure, if his team helps him survive, deals damage so he just has to clean-up, etc. he'll do it. But if he gets focused, he'll die. Or GTFO at low health without damaging anyone apart from his original target. + Show Spoiler [non-concise example] +I just finished a game where a bruta-BT-warmogs Zed killed our Ezreal several times. Why? Well, for one, noone peeled for Ez (I'd have done it but as Irelia there's stuff I do better than help killing a warmogs wearing dude), and moreover Ez didn't build anything defensive until his GA. I don't know if he managed to survive when that happened, Zed killed him several times but apparently he needed more than his combo (which means "hey, if we cc this guy Ez will survive and lifesteal back to healthiness", and he'll even end up healthier if we cc during the combo). So if Ez had randuin's instead of GA, or warmogs? Ez would have survived. Dueled I don't know, but definitely survived.
When Zed killed him through our peels, he had invested almost 3k (about 40% of his money at the time) in that warmogs. Ez hadn't invested anything into defensive itemis. Then Zed bought GA.
(I'll admit that I was surprised to see Zed with 315 AD from just bruta, BT, masteries and quints.)
I was playing Irelia (you can check lolking on Armoric, fucking tanky build since AP Nid was fed as hell and they'd focus me most of the time, 2 to 3 damage dealers and Nami's cc), I killed most of them 1v1 at one point or the other but when they focused me in teamfights they'd kill me. Often without me killing my target. Was fine. We won several fights because I'd occupy 2 of them and Ezreal would survive either through peeling or GA active; had Ezreal built warmogs (or even a belt instead of BF after his GA) he could even have survived Zed's combo reliably while their glass-cannon champs would be zoned because too low from me, and Zed dead. We proceed to win the 4v3. TL;DR: I wish I had recorded a replay, because bruta-BT-warmogs Zed was a first and I'm really curious to know how it fared when trying to dive Ezreal, pre and post GA. Also when Zed killed through peels and lived, he had invested more than half his money in defensive itemization. That's almost bruiser more than assassin here. + Show Spoiler [Passive mids example] +Karthus can lane without fighting an assassin. You can accomodate picks around that (hell, people lane swapped just to give a safe laning phase to Vayne or Kog).
About passive mids getting assassinated in the river, well, 3 things:
- they're passive because they don't go in the river, be it for invades or for roaming, anyway.
- if they went, even in s2, they would get ambushed by champs like Annie or Ahri, so they'd die all the same, and it wouldn't be "assassinated".
- if an assassin can 100-0 somebody, even a popular roaming mid like Ahri or Diana would get assassinated in the river then.
Put assassins out of the picture. Passive mids aren't loved currently because the meta makes them weak at the competitive level. They don't have what is currently required (map presence, potential for pressure). It's not a particular example, it doesn't have to do with other roles specifically. If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. TL;DR: Passive mids didn't fit s2 competitive meta (sorry Jiji). If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. You can blame assassins for being able to kill glass-cannon, I can blame squishies for not fitting the meta. Do you blame Malzahar because his roaming is vulnerable or do you blame Ahri because she ambushes and kills him? If AD carries have to be tankier (without going BT->warmogs->randuin's I mean, of course that'd be a concern), how is it a problem? Of course the full glass-cannon build doesn't work as well anymore. But then, if your carries build boots/BT/PD/LW/GA/warmogs they're still the pinacle of dps. They're still kings at killing towers (shush Nidalee and Jayce). It's just that the pinacle of dps has lowered. It doesn't make AD carries non-viable, though. And they still truck bruisers for 200+ dps while being ranged. You know, it's been awhile since AP carries don't 100-0 stuff anymore, past midgame. Burst mages with such potential have been nerfed (hi Gragas, hey Eve). Did we say "oh AP carries can't burst down targets anymore, they're useless and non-viable"? Nop. Meta evolved. We moved toward sustained damage, we moved toward utility, we moved toward map pressure. But we moved away from full damage. We adapted. Then why not just do the same for AD Assassins? Isn't that what I have been arguing for all along?
They did it for AP mages, right.
Did they have to do it, though?
Was it the right thing to do, or even a right thing to do?
Do we have to take the exact same approach to assassin'?
If you give utility to assassins' and lower their damage, then they aren't assassins anymore, anyway.
I want the game to keep assassins. And I want them to be somewhat viable. It makes for diversity, gives more archetypes to play with, hell, AD caster is dubious from a design standpoint but they went for it because it was "cooler" than having Pantheon or Talon be AP casters, and they'll certainly have other ideas for "cool" assassin archetypes so they'll want them in the game (which isn't a good thing per see, I just mean that even Riot has interest in keeping the role in the game).
Imagine if we could kill bruisers without AD carries. Then AD carries would be "unfun" because they'd be so much less fair, those slippery ranged characters with OP damage that can kill everything in the game under 5 seconds. Should we remove them too?
|
On January 11 2013 13:32 Alaric wrote:
Imagine if we could kill bruisers without AD carries. Then AD carries would be "unfun" because they'd be so much less fair, those slippery ranged characters with OP damage that can kill everything in the game under 5 seconds. Should we remove them too?
We shouldn't stop removing things until Mundo is the only champion left.
...man I've been wanting to play a 5 on 5 mundo match for _so_ long.
|
On January 11 2013 13:32 Alaric wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 12:58 Kupon3ss wrote:
The difference between am and an assassin is that am can't randomly instagib a hero whenever it wants
The main problem is that assassins are inherently Antifun in a game that needs to appeal to casuals. When there are champs that as a principle just randomly walks up to you and instagibs you without any danger to themselves while continuously scaling to be constantly able to do so, people are going to complain I like Talon. I find it fun to use his combo, and kill somebody. What I like the most is, when played mid and especially against a long-ranged mage, the feeling of outplaying when you finally get in E range and you get to unload your combo on him while he can't just cc you and walk away, or Flash. Because you silenced him. + Show Spoiler [Rest of old/new rant] +Pantheon wouldn't get his whole HSS on a fleeing enemy if he didn't stun said enemy first.
Imagine Jax Leap Striking on a target without using Counterstrike first. Woops, Caitlyn used her net and now you're all sad and you can't hit her. The same would happen to Talon if he had no silence on his E. He wouldn't get his combo off.
On the other hand, he doesn't kill you in the blink of an eye. There is a slight wind down on his E. W has a travel time and has to come back. Same with his ult, even moreso if you want to use it to escape and so don't trigger the second part right away.
There is counterplay because during this time, you can use all kind of stuff to interrupt him. I had a great game where I would loath Cho'Gath (because fuck Cho'Gath really, I find he makes games really boring but whatever) who is sitting in front of his team. So I would try to flank them and jump on Draven after the teamfight was engaged by one side. At the start it worked well, but after 3 fights Lulu started sitting close to him, and she'd ult him, or polymorphs me during my combo.
Draven gets to live! But it also means his team has to fight 3v4 while he defends against me with Lulu.
I get to kill Draven 1v1. Doing my assassin's job. But in situations of bigger fights, I'm not as useful. I am exposed to counterplay. I don't "randomly instagib a champion whenever I want", I don't "randomly walks up to you and instagib you without any danger to myself". TL;DR: I have already pointed it out a lot, but it has more to do with power creep and kits' issues than with assassins in general. "Old school" assassins need some time to kill you (Pantheon, Akali, Talon, pre-rework Katarina who was more reliant on her ult so had to get at least 2 seconds out of it to get a solo kill), and often rely on multiple gap closer or cc to keep you from escaping by yourself, giving them the edge in 1v1s but making them weaker in teamfights where you can get help. Newers ones (Rengar, Zed, Kha'Zix, Eve) can burst you down much faster (admittedly thanks to stealth removing the awareness and gap closing aspects, for some) and have better sustained damage, so they're both stronger and less opened to counterplay. I don't really like it (and I don't really like them either, for the most part), but I see this as a problem inherent to the design process of champions, rather than an assassin problem in general. Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 13:08 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 12:59 Alaric wrote:On January 11 2013 12:01 cLutZ wrote:On January 11 2013 11:24 Alaric wrote:
If the other team has an assassin, they you can run an assassin too. If the other team has an assassin... you can splitpush or poke comp and refuse to let him get a chance to fight! If the other team has an assassin, you can focus on assassinating him.
You can use super duelists like Jax that can't be assassinated and let him deal with the enemy bruisers. You can run Karhus and melt entire teams.
You can run Trundle just to fuck up people because he replaces any LW or BC you could need when the enemy team only has one guy relying on resistances to bolster his EHP, and send Elise destroy those HP bags.
You're saying "it's bad because AD carries aren't viable". But before that, it was assassins who weren't viable, you said it yourself.
Also passive mids (except Karthus) aren't viable (or at least not popular) at the competitive level because you need pressure and map presence.
Stuff like Poppy? Nasus? Veigar? Too farm reliant! Not enough roaming capabilities! etc. etc.
I don't see a problem with AD not being as good (they're still viable with only 3 damage items really). Diversity, yay! 1. Counter an assassin with an assassin? Joke right? 2. Splitpush: Depending on who you run, the assassin will be either able to slaughter the SP-er or slaughter your carry in a 5v4. 3. Jax is a fine plan, but there are not many characters that can duplicate Jax. 4. You can't Run Karthus because he will just die to the assassin. Both in lane and in teamfights. 5. Passive mids aren't played much atm because they will just get Assassinated in the river. 6. Poppy and Nasus are champs that have issues, not an entire group of characters. Oh please I asked you to stop with the goddamn Antimage thing. Antimage is a mix of Jax/Olaf's survivablity with Vayne's damage output and Katarina/Akali's (assuming they get resets). The guy is designed to 1v5 once farmed! Will your assassin do that? Nope. Sure, if his team helps him survive, deals damage so he just has to clean-up, etc. he'll do it. But if he gets focused, he'll die. Or GTFO at low health without damaging anyone apart from his original target. + Show Spoiler [non-concise example] +I just finished a game where a bruta-BT-warmogs Zed killed our Ezreal several times. Why? Well, for one, noone peeled for Ez (I'd have done it but as Irelia there's stuff I do better than help killing a warmogs wearing dude), and moreover Ez didn't build anything defensive until his GA. I don't know if he managed to survive when that happened, Zed killed him several times but apparently he needed more than his combo (which means "hey, if we cc this guy Ez will survive and lifesteal back to healthiness", and he'll even end up healthier if we cc during the combo). So if Ez had randuin's instead of GA, or warmogs? Ez would have survived. Dueled I don't know, but definitely survived.
When Zed killed him through our peels, he had invested almost 3k (about 40% of his money at the time) in that warmogs. Ez hadn't invested anything into defensive itemis. Then Zed bought GA.
(I'll admit that I was surprised to see Zed with 315 AD from just bruta, BT, masteries and quints.)
I was playing Irelia (you can check lolking on Armoric, fucking tanky build since AP Nid was fed as hell and they'd focus me most of the time, 2 to 3 damage dealers and Nami's cc), I killed most of them 1v1 at one point or the other but when they focused me in teamfights they'd kill me. Often without me killing my target. Was fine. We won several fights because I'd occupy 2 of them and Ezreal would survive either through peeling or GA active; had Ezreal built warmogs (or even a belt instead of BF after his GA) he could even have survived Zed's combo reliably while their glass-cannon champs would be zoned because too low from me, and Zed dead. We proceed to win the 4v3. TL;DR: I wish I had recorded a replay, because bruta-BT-warmogs Zed was a first and I'm really curious to know how it fared when trying to dive Ezreal, pre and post GA. Also when Zed killed through peels and lived, he had invested more than half his money in defensive itemization. That's almost bruiser more than assassin here. + Show Spoiler [Passive mids example] +Karthus can lane without fighting an assassin. You can accomodate picks around that (hell, people lane swapped just to give a safe laning phase to Vayne or Kog).
About passive mids getting assassinated in the river, well, 3 things:
- they're passive because they don't go in the river, be it for invades or for roaming, anyway.
- if they went, even in s2, they would get ambushed by champs like Annie or Ahri, so they'd die all the same, and it wouldn't be "assassinated".
- if an assassin can 100-0 somebody, even a popular roaming mid like Ahri or Diana would get assassinated in the river then.
Put assassins out of the picture. Passive mids aren't loved currently because the meta makes them weak at the competitive level. They don't have what is currently required (map presence, potential for pressure). It's not a particular example, it doesn't have to do with other roles specifically. If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. TL;DR: Passive mids didn't fit s2 competitive meta (sorry Jiji). If we say "squishy ranged carries aren't popular in this meta because they blow up too easily", it's the same. You can blame assassins for being able to kill glass-cannon, I can blame squishies for not fitting the meta. Do you blame Malzahar because his roaming is vulnerable or do you blame Ahri because she ambushes and kills him? If AD carries have to be tankier (without going BT->warmogs->randuin's I mean, of course that'd be a concern), how is it a problem? Of course the full glass-cannon build doesn't work as well anymore. But then, if your carries build boots/BT/PD/LW/GA/warmogs they're still the pinacle of dps. They're still kings at killing towers (shush Nidalee and Jayce). It's just that the pinacle of dps has lowered. It doesn't make AD carries non-viable, though. And they still truck bruisers for 200+ dps while being ranged. You know, it's been awhile since AP carries don't 100-0 stuff anymore, past midgame. Burst mages with such potential have been nerfed (hi Gragas, hey Eve). Did we say "oh AP carries can't burst down targets anymore, they're useless and non-viable"? Nop. Meta evolved. We moved toward sustained damage, we moved toward utility, we moved toward map pressure. But we moved away from full damage. We adapted. Then why not just do the same for AD Assassins? Isn't that what I have been arguing for all along? They did it for AP mages, right. Did they have to do it, though? Was it the right thing to do, or even a right thing to do? Do we have to take the exact same approach to assassin'? If you give utility to assassins' and lower their damage, then they aren't assassins anymore, anyway. I want the game to keep assassins. And I want them to be somewhat viable. It makes for diversity, gives more archetypes to play with, hell, AD caster is dubious from a design standpoint but they went for it because it was "cooler" than having Pantheon or Talon be AP casters, and they'll certainly have other ideas for "cool" assassin archetypes so they'll want them in the game (which isn't a good thing per see, I just mean that even Riot has interest in keeping the role in the game). Imagine if we could kill bruisers without AD carries. Then AD carries would be "unfun" because they'd be so much less fair, those slippery ranged characters with OP damage that can kill everything in the game under 5 seconds. Should we remove them too?
Unless its something like leesin that's not something explicitly designed with "assassin" in mind, assassin effectiveness is basically op if instagib weak if not, without utility there's no logical way of balancing something whose main use is 100-0
This talk about ad carries being unfun, did you miss all the balance patches during the second half of s2?
Cool and unique concepts are often inherently "unfun" as defined by riot and tend to get the nerf treatment from riot as soon as it becomes popular instead of them unnecessarily raisin the skill requirement of the game for casuals needing to think about specific champs instead of just the roles
|
how do you categorize assassin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
