[Patch 3.08: Aatrox Patch] General Discussion - Page 289

On July 02 2013 23:21 kainzero wrote:
Aren't there 1v2 offlaners that are good because they excel in 1v2 and wouldn't be as good in 1v1?

Can't have everything.

On July 02 2013 22:58 GettingIt wrote:
So apparently Riot is working on a way to discourage 2v1 lane scenarios, especially among the pros. Why does Riot insist on changing the way the game is played to whatever it is they want?

On July 02 2013 23:21 kainzero wrote:
Aren't there 1v2 offlaners that are good because they excel in 1v2 and wouldn't be as good in 1v1?

Can't have everything.

On July 02 2013 23:29 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
Move lane xp amount multiple champions down to the low 50 percentile. Currently it's like 60% for 2, and like 55% for 3 people. They could also alter tower damage to minions so it's easier to last hit at extremely low levels.

On July 02 2013 23:33 Requizen wrote:

After playing Smite for a bit, one of the big things that makes 1v2 lanes easier (aside from higher/easier sustain and clear) is that you get gold/xp from minions you don't kill - but more from the ones you do. This means supports get more gold (leading to the role being actually fun) and that you're not completely screwed if you're a melee in a 1v2 lane.

Obviously this isn't something they can't just implement, but maybe something similar can be at least tested.

On July 02 2013 23:37 SnK-Arcbound wrote:

Maybe tower killed minions give gold based on how close you are to the turret or something. That makes it so freezing is still powerful, but zoning off of your turret isn't so frustrating. It would also incentivize the killing of turrets over poking at the turret.

On July 02 2013 22:58 GettingIt wrote:
So apparently Riot is working on a way to discourage 2v1 lane scenarios, especially among the pros. Why does Riot insist on changing the way the game is played to whatever it is they want?

On July 02 2013 23:39 Requizen wrote:

Well we're already looking at 3-4 minute tower kills,I don't think they need to make it more lucrative.

Not that it really bothers me. I understand that it sucks for solo laners, but it also means shorter "laning phases", which I'm pretty ok with. Roam/skirmish phase is much more interesting to watch for me.

On July 02 2013 23:28 Ketara wrote:


Oh no! Riot is attempting to balance the game! Everybody get out your pitchforks!

Last I checked the actual quote from Riot was something like...

"2v1 in competitive is insanely abusive to pure melee. 2v1 is actually a problem - it invalidates laning phase which (while interesting strategically) really smooshes the champion pool down and removes characters who can be picked for laning strengths. It'd be OK as an occasional gambit or risk, but not as the most effective way to win in the most situations."

I do recall the LCS commentators saying that for EU 75% of games involve a laneswap.

So lets see if I get this right.

1 - Riot wants all the champions they design to be viable in competitive play (SHOCK AND GASP)

2 - Riot has designed melee champions (SHOCK AND GASP)

3 - Riot has designed champions that are designed to be very strong early game and weaker later on (SHOCK AND GASP)

4 - Riot actually likes laneswaps as an occasional strategy, but thinks they're too strong to the point that they prevent melee and early game champions from ever being played competitively. (A logical conclusion supported by actual evidence, SHOCK AND GASP)

5 - Riot decides to nerf 2v1ing. I am willing to bet that they will nerf 2v1ing so that it's still viable as an occasional gambit or risk, but make it so it's no longer the most effective way to win in most situations.

Oh but wait oh no that's the worst thing evarrrrrrrrrr

On July 02 2013 23:47 Silvanel wrote:


Riot should stop introducing bad heros, and let the game sort itself out. They are making conclusions based on too small amount of games. They already proved they are bad at balancing game, they should slow down.

On July 02 2013 23:54 Numy wrote:
Bad at designing and bad at balancing are two completely different things. Why would you misquote him like that.

From what we have seen they ARE bad at balancing unless they purposely tell the community lies since from what they had said and the consequences of what they have done have been completely different. Also tend to be very gun ho about changes instead of waiting a bit.

On July 03 2013 00:01 Sandster wrote:
By the way, who do you guys pick to lane against Trynd?

I feel like if he gets 2 crits at level 1-2 you're pretty much forced out of lane, especially if you get to lane late leashing and he has fury built up already.