| Forum Index > LoL General |
Interested in helping start an on-topic, serious League discussion thread? PM Neo to talk about how to get started. | ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
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. AH AH AH. Jayce/Kennen/Shen/most «viable» 1v2s laners are incredibly strong 1v1 agressively as well. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
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? 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 | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
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. Good 1v2ers are characterized by high sustain and/or the ability to farm and clear from a range. Any solo laner who brings that top is going to be strong. | ||
|
SnK-Arcbound
United States4423 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
Although, that arguably might be a good thing. Bot has so many wards these days. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
I imagine it will be something weird like that, since they said their solution was a "complex math problem" | ||
|
SnK-Arcbound
United States4423 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
TheLink
Australia2725 Posts
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? From Riot's perspective there is no such thing as perfect balance, the way Blizzard strives for it. The game could dispense free handjobs after each queue and Riot would still change it around after a few months just to keep things new. It's not a matter of something is unfun or imbalanced it's just they always want something new. | ||
|
SnK-Arcbound
United States4423 Posts
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. The original point of the 2v1 was to take the turret early. Now people realize you can completely fuck someone out of gold for the first 7 or so minutes if you poke him under the turret so you can dive. Keeping its purpose intact but nerfing the unintended concequence seems better then nerfing the entire strategy. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4725 Posts
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 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. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
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. Yes their design of the most popular competitive game in the world truly proves they are bad at designing a competitive game. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
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. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4725 Posts
| ||
|
Sandster
United States4054 Posts
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. | ||
|
Nos-
Canada12016 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
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. Yeah this 2v1 balance change that hasn't even been unveiled yet is super bad, lets talk about how dumb an idea it is for the next 10 pages of the thread. I really wish that for once we could actually talk about the game and try to understand it better and improve as players rather than shitting all over every single new thing that pops up. TL GD these days is every pro team is terrible, every pro player is terrible, every new champion is stupid, every balance change is too hasty and dumb if you don't like it and didn't come fast enough if you do like it, every tournament is somehow not good enough, every streamer is boring. I get so tired of it. You all obviously enjoy playing the game because you're playing the game and posting in the forums, why can't we talk about actually playing the game and getting better at playing the game instead of screaming about how terrible the game is all the time. 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. Can we talk about THIS for a while? A couple pages of this would actually be useful discussion. | ||
NeoIllusions
United States37500 Posts
While I'll be the first TL user to step up and say Riot tends to "meddle" too often when it comes to balance, I don't think the 2v1/1v2 change is a bad thing. Let's wait just a little bit for more information before sharpening our pitchforks. I'm really tired of reading hyperbole about how bad Riot is at "xx". Much of what Riot has done is rather progressive for our game, it's simply the frequency that's bothering. As for champion design QQ, please use the QQ thread. You're welcome to whine but whine at the appropriate location, somewhere I don't have to read it. Be this fair warning to all. Thank you and g'day. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
For freewin you pick Teemo. Harrass all day, when Trynd commits he runs into endless shrooms and gets blinded etc. One of the hardest counters in the entire game, and Teemo counters him all game long. For a little bit more challenge, you can try Jax, Malphite, Fiora, Pantheon, Jayce. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
