[Patch 3.09: Spirit Guard Udyr Patch] General Discussion -…

On July 27 2013 04:35 NeoIllusions wrote:
TL LoL Inhouse attempt #314235 has commenced. glhf~

On July 27 2013 04:35 NeoIllusions wrote:
TL LoL Inhouse attempt #314235 has commenced. glhf~

On July 27 2013 04:29 Requizen wrote:
Well, a couple things there.

First, I'm not saying that you're ever going to get the same gold on every character on a team. That's impossible. But the gold differential between top/mid/marksman and jungle/support, unless the jungler is getting a lot of kills, is often so large it isn't even funny. I'm talking about closing that gap, not eliminating it. It really, really sucks playing a jungler and having those games where you don't get ganks but spend so much time hanging in lanes trying to gank that you have like an SotAG/boots/parts of Bulwark by the time you Cait is finishing her full build. Exaggeration, but you understand where I'm coming from.

Second, I don't see anything wrong with your scenario you put forth. While I don't mind the current meta in theoretical terms, I'm tired of seeing it EVERY SINGLE GAME. So the idea of a carry jungler with early game lane bullies in all lanes seems pretty fucking interesting, honestly.

On July 27 2013 04:39 mordek wrote:

What a tease.

On July 27 2013 04:34 krndandaman wrote:
just got a verbal harassment warning after playing 1 game on my smurf that I don't even play much. anyone know why this is?
I didn't even talk at all during that game, I was completely silent lol except for saying gg at the end. or is it because of something I said like a week ago in a game (last time I played on smurf)? I don't recall anything lol I'm usually quiet in games especially on my smurf.

On July 27 2013 04:44 .AK wrote:

I feel like this is a joke that went over my head :O. It says I do not have enough permission to enter.

On July 27 2013 04:47 AsmodeusXI wrote:


LOL HE PUT IT IN THE STAFF FORUM

NEO SKILLZ GG

On July 27 2013 04:47 Requizen wrote:

Shoulda put in in the TL+ forum

On July 27 2013 04:40 TheYango wrote:

The thing is, such an extreme division of gold is more or less the logical conclusion of the way multiplicative scaling works in this game. Your team's overall effectiveness is maximized when you stack the gold income on a smaller number of income points because the effective gain of concentrated gold is higher than dispersed gold, since both damage stats and defensive stats scale multiplicatively. Having a slightly more farmed jungler is not worth the cost of an equally less-farmed laner because of this.

I have literally said this since the end of S2. You don't get the jungler farmed by putting more gold for him to get. You get the jungler farmed by creating reasons for teams to have a farmed jungler. This is an itemization problem, not a map design problem--it involves designing items that are critical enough to a team that having a jungler hit those powerful item timings outweighs the multiplicative benefit of more items on a carry. The only item that has had a suitably strong timing for this is Aegis and look at what Riot is doing with that.

With the way farm allocation in the game works, any deficit in farm on a particular point can be made up by assigning lane farm once lanes have broken down. This is exactly how 1v2 laners get farm despite getting very little during the laning phase--teams actively allocate farm to them to catch up when lanes have broken down. The nature of early game has little relevance to mid-lategame farm allocation, because you can always freely choose who gets to clean pushed lanes. So the fact that junglers aren't getting to farm has nothing to do with how the early game plays, and has more to do with there simply not being incentive to farm the jungler when a pushed lane comes across and someone needs to go clear it.

On July 27 2013 04:48 AsmodeusXI wrote:


Then we'd have to let YOU in.

On July 27 2013 04:48 cLutZ wrote:
Except, you cannot separate the two. I bolded that section because it shows the problem. Because the jungler is behind, the optimal choice is often to leave said champion behind. If at midgame he was ahead, then you have the choice. That is what people want, the choice.

On July 27 2013 04:32 UniversalSnip wrote:

To be clear, it didn't use to be this way. This is an appeal to tradition, which is sketchy to start with, but it also ignores the fact that the combination of many many jungle changes is what got us here. In season one the jungler was very likely to be a carry and to do just that, carry.

On July 27 2013 04:40 TheYango wrote:

The thing is, such an extreme division of gold is more or less the logical conclusion of the way multiplicative scaling works in this game. Your team's overall effectiveness is maximized when you stack the gold income on a smaller number of income points because the effective gain of concentrated gold is higher than dispersed gold, since both damage stats and defensive stats scale multiplicatively. Having a slightly more farmed jungler is not worth the cost of an equally less-farmed laner because of this.

I have literally said this since the end of S2. You don't get the jungler farmed by putting more gold for him to get. You get the jungler farmed by creating reasons for teams to have a farmed jungler. This is an itemization problem, not a map design problem--it involves designing items that are critical enough to a team that having a jungler hit those powerful item timings outweighs the multiplicative benefit of more items on a carry. The only item that has had a suitably strong timing for this is Aegis and look at what Riot is doing with that.

With the way farm allocation in the game works, any deficit in farm on a particular point can be made up by assigning lane farm once lanes have broken down. This is exactly how 1v2 laners get farm despite getting very little during the laning phase--teams actively allocate farm to them to catch up when lanes have broken down. The nature of early game has little relevance to mid-lategame farm allocation, because you can always freely choose who gets to clean pushed lanes. So the fact that junglers aren't getting to farm has nothing to do with how the early game plays, and has more to do with there simply not being incentive to farm the jungler when a pushed lane comes across and someone needs to go clear it.

On July 27 2013 04:51 TheYango wrote:
And how do you create that choice? A farmed jungler has to come at the expense of taking that farm off a solo laner. Such an option exists already, particularly since in 1v2 lanes, laning phase breaks with the 1v2 laner having approximately similar farm to the jungler.

It's just that people select junglers with ganking power, early game strength, and mediocre farming ability so by and large when you're picking between farming the 1v2 laner and the jungler, you farm the 1v2 laner because his hero does more with farm, even though at the point where laning phase broke they had equivalent farm.

On July 27 2013 04:48 AsmodeusXI wrote:


Then we'd have to let YOU in.

On July 27 2013 04:48 cLutZ wrote:


Except, you cannot separate the two. I bolded that section because it shows the problem. Because the jungler is behind, the optimal choice is often to leave said champion behind. If at midgame he was ahead, then you have the choice. That is what people want, the choice.

On July 27 2013 04:53 TheYango wrote:
In competitive play, the choice already exists--it just isn't made due to champ selection and convention. In solo queue, even if the choice existed, you wouldn't get to farm a jungler because no top laner would listen to you if you told him to be poor and carry the Aegis while you got to farm. He'd tell you to go fuck off.