|
On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu.
I greatly prefer games that have more controlled RNG, and I feel that we're more in that realm with the RNG-in-LoL discussion.
|
On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu.
Gogo Australia!
|
On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu.
A well designed board game are basically RNG independent as strategy is a dominant factor.
|
On March 15 2013 12:13 MoonBear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:07 zodde wrote:
What is the downside to removing RNG? In what way is RNG a good thing? Crit RNG in LoL isn't that big of a factor on who wins games, but it surely CAN decide a game.
Why are so many people against removing small random advantages that have nothing to do with skill from this game? Interestingly, this was something discussed before when it came to MtG and TF2. The principle from Richard Garfield was that small amounts of RNG is interesting from a casual and spectator standpoint while not imbalancing the game if designed properly and so long as there is room for people to play correctly while taking random elements into account. This principle was what influenced TF2 to add crits into the game as one of the devs used to work in MtG iirc. There is so much I could write, but I'll let the man speak for himself. There's also this good Gamasutra article.
Gonna read those, but I guess I can accept the small amount of RNG that lol crits are. I just have burning hatred for RNG since WoW PvP, haven't really heard a good argument for RNG before. If done right, a pseudo-RNG system like the one that LoL is using for crits should be balanced enough for a competative game. Removing the possibility to have crits at lvl 1 would probably be good too (no one ever starts brawler gloves, but perhaps removing crit runes? Small issue anyways), since early game crits have the biggest outcome on a game I'd say.
On the note of BW high ground advantage, 30% damage reduction seems much more reasonable then 30% miss chance. 30% miss chance is a really big random factor, and it could definately decide a game.
Leaving this discussion now, hybrid pen runes sounds like fun ^^
|
On March 15 2013 12:31 Alaric wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:27 wei2coolman wrote:On March 15 2013 12:24 NeoIllusions wrote:On March 15 2013 09:06 Craton wrote:On March 15 2013 08:59 Zooper31 wrote:On March 15 2013 08:51 Dusty wrote:
I dunno, I think I would like a crit system that works like so:
Every attack adds between 0-100 crit. which adds to a crit "meter" and every time it hits or goes over 100 the meter resets and the next attack will crit. I think that would make it less RNG based. Interesting way to think about it. Then it turns crit into an every 3-4 auto attack and you wait to charge it up etc lol. The reason people love and hate crit is the same reason, the randomness and the rush of excitement you get when you actually do crit. I think it's fine the way it is imo. The reason they didn't do this is because they didn't want guaranteed crits on enemy champions that you could just charge up on minions. Having separate meters for players and minions is just convoluted, as is an arbitrarily reduced amount for hitting minions instead of champions or removing the ability to crit minions. In any event, I hate any and all forms of RNG in games. Do you play any board or card games? Old Man Craton probably lost one too many monopoly games as a child. Or probably loss his D&D character to fortitude check or something. It's not always RNG, one way or the other, though. 
Oh man; that comic.
the nightmares... the nightmares. I know I've lost characters due to multi 1 rolls >.<
|
On March 14 2013 14:33 onlywonderboy wrote:Posted this in the Ahri thread but didn't get any responses, I think that means it's cool to x-post here and see if anyone has any insight. Show nested quote +Been looking to play Ahri recently but can't seem to decide what I want to build so figured I'd turn to TL for help. I know Grail rush used to be the thing on her in Season 2 and I tried that but with it having 30 less AP than before I felt hurt my burst too much. She's mana hungry so I figure I want either Tear or Chalice for laning. I guess she would stack tear pretty slowly but I find myself favoring it over Chalice for mana in lane, just a personal thing. Or maybe skip mana, grab a Doran's Ring and just start stacking AP? In theory I like the new DFG on her a lot, being able to amply the damage on her burst would be nice, plus some CDR. Just kinda spouting out random thoughts now. Help please!
I posted asking the same thing a couple of weeks ago, Im in the same boat that you are in. My issue is that if I dont snowball from lane I cannot find a way to deal enough damage midgame. And then lategame you just feel like a charm bot, but even bf S3 Ahri was to some degree like that. Especially now that midgame bruisers have 3000+ health - I just cant kill them, its infuriating. Here's to hoping that someone on these forums have an answer
On March 15 2013 02:58 BlackPaladin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 02:39 sylverfyre wrote:On March 15 2013 02:25 Alaric wrote:
Hi there Blitz. Will you pull flash-less Ashe or Zhonya Karthus? Karthus is really fed so we should pull him and focus him! Right? Right? Makes sense to me. Lets do this.
Or you could do the next level play and wait until the teamfight starts then flash out of your team, and hook him away
from them before he dies. Would be so worth.
On March 15 2013 05:09 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 04:20 Ghost-z wrote:
If games didn't snowball so hard in league, best of 1s would be more viable.
There's also blue/purple imbalance right now.
Not sure that this is a big an issue as people make it out to be anymore - Riot did a good job actively changing this with the map changes beginning in S3.
On March 15 2013 07:39 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:38 thenexusp wrote:On March 15 2013 07:30 NeoIllusions wrote:What a beast of a write-up. 20 games is nothing to scoff at. X_X Thanks to everyone involved: writers, editors, and artists. For TeamLiquid~ You make me go to reddit to find the link to the writeup I see what you did there I dunno what you're talking about. I've done nothing wrong... >_____> Thanks in advance guys. <3
It was great as always Neoillusions. I honestly light up every time I read something written by the writing staff here. Gj, keep it up :D.
Also, what do you guys think of starting red/blue pot on supports? I was thinking about it earlier when krepo would have lived (during his stream) if he had like 100 more health on thresh - And i find myself asking why not? I mean, you are going to all in anyway like 4-5ish on champs like thresh, or leona, where 15 ad might be good. Or like the cdr on a Janna or lulu could make or break a fight early. Seems strong to me, and worth if you get a lane advantage
|
I also strongly recommend garfield's blog/podcast.
http://www.threedonkeys.com/blog/
On March 15 2013 12:46 xes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu. A well designed board game are basically RNG independent as strategy is a dominant factor.
No way. A well designed board game for a very specific audience, sure.
|
On March 15 2013 12:48 zodde wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:13 MoonBear wrote:On March 15 2013 12:07 zodde wrote:
What is the downside to removing RNG? In what way is RNG a good thing? Crit RNG in LoL isn't that big of a factor on who wins games, but it surely CAN decide a game.
Why are so many people against removing small random advantages that have nothing to do with skill from this game? Interestingly, this was something discussed before when it came to MtG and TF2. The principle from Richard Garfield was that small amounts of RNG is interesting from a casual and spectator standpoint while not imbalancing the game if designed properly and so long as there is room for people to play correctly while taking random elements into account. This principle was what influenced TF2 to add crits into the game as one of the devs used to work in MtG iirc. There is so much I could write, but I'll let the man speak for himself. There's also this good Gamasutra article. Gonna read those, but I guess I can accept the small amount of RNG that lol crits are. I just have burning hatred for RNG since WoW PvP, haven't really heard a good argument for RNG before. If done right, a pseudo-RNG system like the one that LoL is using for crits should be balanced enough for a competative game. Removing the possibility to have crits at lvl 1 would probably be good too (no one ever starts brawler gloves, but perhaps removing crit runes? Small issue anyways), since early game crits have the biggest outcome on a game I'd say.
Basically, if you look at the Heartbeat comment, that same crit at lvl 4-5 means much less. This is why people don't understand that if you get crit at lvl 1 you can't "just play smart" playing smart means you lose less hard. Its like, if you are vs. Janna/Kog as Taric/Urgot, and somehow get double crit and can't abuse them early on, but manage to keep up in CS, you lost even though you played smart.
Edit
On March 15 2013 05:09 TheYango wrote:
Not sure that this is a big an issue as people make it out to be anymore - Riot did a good job actively changing this with the map changes beginning in S3.
No. The meta evolution is the only thing that has mitigated it.
|
On March 15 2013 12:48 zodde wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:13 MoonBear wrote:On March 15 2013 12:07 zodde wrote:
What is the downside to removing RNG? In what way is RNG a good thing? Crit RNG in LoL isn't that big of a factor on who wins games, but it surely CAN decide a game.
Why are so many people against removing small random advantages that have nothing to do with skill from this game? Interestingly, this was something discussed before when it came to MtG and TF2. The principle from Richard Garfield was that small amounts of RNG is interesting from a casual and spectator standpoint while not imbalancing the game if designed properly and so long as there is room for people to play correctly while taking random elements into account. This principle was what influenced TF2 to add crits into the game as one of the devs used to work in MtG iirc. There is so much I could write, but I'll let the man speak for himself. There's also this good Gamasutra article. Gonna read those, but I guess I can accept the small amount of RNG that lol crits are. I just have burning hatred for RNG since WoW PvP, haven't really heard a good argument for RNG before. If done right, a pseudo-RNG system like the one that LoL is using for crits should be balanced enough for a competative game. Removing the possibility to have crits at lvl 1 would probably be good too (no one ever starts brawler gloves, but perhaps removing crit runes? Small issue anyways), since early game crits have the biggest outcome on a game I'd say. On the note of BW high ground advantage, 30% damage reduction seems much more reasonable then 30% miss chance. 30% miss chance is a really big random factor, and it could definately decide a game. Leaving this discussion now, hybrid pen runes sounds like fun ^^
It's the same thing, and BW had a 55% hit chance uphill. It was a common misconception that it was 70%.
|
On March 15 2013 12:50 Purge wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 05:09 TheYango wrote:On March 15 2013 04:20 Ghost-z wrote:
If games didn't snowball so hard in league, best of 1s would be more viable.
There's also blue/purple imbalance right now. Not sure that this is a big an issue as people make it out to be anymore - Riot did a good job actively changing this with the map changes beginning in S3.
Even in lower level pro-NA LCS play, Blue/Purp side matters; it becomes a bigger and bigger deciding factor in the highest echelon of play (Chinese/Kr scene)
|
United States47024 Posts
On March 15 2013 12:54 obesechicken13 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:48 zodde wrote:On March 15 2013 12:13 MoonBear wrote:On March 15 2013 12:07 zodde wrote:
What is the downside to removing RNG? In what way is RNG a good thing? Crit RNG in LoL isn't that big of a factor on who wins games, but it surely CAN decide a game.
Why are so many people against removing small random advantages that have nothing to do with skill from this game? Interestingly, this was something discussed before when it came to MtG and TF2. The principle from Richard Garfield was that small amounts of RNG is interesting from a casual and spectator standpoint while not imbalancing the game if designed properly and so long as there is room for people to play correctly while taking random elements into account. This principle was what influenced TF2 to add crits into the game as one of the devs used to work in MtG iirc. There is so much I could write, but I'll let the man speak for himself. There's also this good Gamasutra article. Gonna read those, but I guess I can accept the small amount of RNG that lol crits are. I just have burning hatred for RNG since WoW PvP, haven't really heard a good argument for RNG before. If done right, a pseudo-RNG system like the one that LoL is using for crits should be balanced enough for a competative game. Removing the possibility to have crits at lvl 1 would probably be good too (no one ever starts brawler gloves, but perhaps removing crit runes? Small issue anyways), since early game crits have the biggest outcome on a game I'd say. On the note of BW high ground advantage, 30% damage reduction seems much more reasonable then 30% miss chance. 30% miss chance is a really big random factor, and it could definately decide a game. Leaving this discussion now, hybrid pen runes sounds like fun ^^ It's the same thing, and BW had a 55% hit chance uphill. It was a common misconception that it was 70%.
To be fair, it's a misconception because Blizzard officially documented it as 70%. http://classic.battle.net/scc/gs/hc.shtml
|
On March 15 2013 12:54 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:50 Purge wrote:On March 15 2013 05:09 TheYango wrote:On March 15 2013 04:20 Ghost-z wrote:
If games didn't snowball so hard in league, best of 1s would be more viable.
There's also blue/purple imbalance right now. Not sure that this is a big an issue as people make it out to be anymore - Riot did a good job actively changing this with the map changes beginning in S3. Even in lower level pro-NA LCS play, Blue/Purp side matters; it becomes a bigger and bigger deciding factor in the highest echelon of play (Chinese/Kr scene)
I hate to be "that guy" but I really dont want to believe this is true unless I see proof. Thats a very big statement/assumption that undermines alot of players decisions - because you are essentially saying that to some degree player decisions dont matter if they have blue side or that more often than not blue side will inevitably win if you have 2 equally skilled opponents.
So please, if you know where I can find stats to prove that, link
|
United States15536 Posts
On March 15 2013 13:02 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:54 obesechicken13 wrote:On March 15 2013 12:48 zodde wrote:On March 15 2013 12:13 MoonBear wrote:On March 15 2013 12:07 zodde wrote:
What is the downside to removing RNG? In what way is RNG a good thing? Crit RNG in LoL isn't that big of a factor on who wins games, but it surely CAN decide a game.
Why are so many people against removing small random advantages that have nothing to do with skill from this game? Interestingly, this was something discussed before when it came to MtG and TF2. The principle from Richard Garfield was that small amounts of RNG is interesting from a casual and spectator standpoint while not imbalancing the game if designed properly and so long as there is room for people to play correctly while taking random elements into account. This principle was what influenced TF2 to add crits into the game as one of the devs used to work in MtG iirc. There is so much I could write, but I'll let the man speak for himself. There's also this good Gamasutra article. Gonna read those, but I guess I can accept the small amount of RNG that lol crits are. I just have burning hatred for RNG since WoW PvP, haven't really heard a good argument for RNG before. If done right, a pseudo-RNG system like the one that LoL is using for crits should be balanced enough for a competative game. Removing the possibility to have crits at lvl 1 would probably be good too (no one ever starts brawler gloves, but perhaps removing crit runes? Small issue anyways), since early game crits have the biggest outcome on a game I'd say. On the note of BW high ground advantage, 30% damage reduction seems much more reasonable then 30% miss chance. 30% miss chance is a really big random factor, and it could definately decide a game. Leaving this discussion now, hybrid pen runes sounds like fun ^^ It's the same thing, and BW had a 55% hit chance uphill. It was a common misconception that it was 70%. To be fair, it's a misconception because Blizzard officially documented it as 70%. http://classic.battle.net/scc/gs/hc.shtml
Man that website is super old school.
|
For solo queue, the blue advantage is biggest at low Elo and indeterminate at top Elo. Purple teams (used to, probably still do) get up to an average +50 Elo in player ability (i.e. each player is about 10 Elo better than on blue team) to counteract that.
On March 15 2013 12:46 xes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu. A well designed board game are basically RNG independent as strategy is a dominant factor.
That's true of any game, not just board games. There's no enjoyment when the result is independent of your actions.
|
No offense meant but this kind of blue/purple side stuff always gives me an Alex jones crazy vibe to it. *shrug* I am sure that differences do exist but I'd kinda want to see an actual proof of such you know some large sample size and even then I'd be doubtful just because what if the team who won on the better side just happened to actually be the better playing team that game?
|
On March 15 2013 13:38 Parnage wrote:
No offense meant but this kind of blue/purple side stuff always gives me an Alex jones crazy vibe to it. *shrug* I am sure that differences do exist but I'd kinda want to see an actual proof of such you know some large sample size and even then I'd be doubtful just because what if the team who won on the better side just happened to actually be the better playing team that game?
We might get some useful results out of LCS since each matchup will have each team playing each side twice. Each.
|
I recall there being some Ashe talk a few weeks back, so I'm just going to comment randomly here that I'd like to see Riot revert the ult changes they made. Who cares about hawkshot when they can be buffing her ult! Would love to miss more arrows on Ashe all day.
|
to be honest she seems good to me
|
On March 15 2013 12:29 NeoIllusions wrote:
I ask because I play a lot of board/card games, play with a bunch of friends one night every week. Dice games (like Risk) tilt me so hard. Even cool versions of Risk, like Risk Legacy. Nope, focking snake eyes, fu.
I remember I was nearly going to win a risk game (NA + SA op) and then proceeded to get THREE snake eyes in a row which weakened my army enough that they broke my NA defense and proceeded to ass rape me. If I didn't have bad luck I'd have no luck at all.
Although I always loved highground advantage in BW. It made some games so intense.
|
there are gigantic differences between blue and purple side, almost all of them are advantageous for blue side, and differences that go beyond just double golems. They matter more in lane swap games too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/shiroiusagi/redditicon.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/shiroiusagi/twitter.gif)
