|
On September 17 2013 02:15 Ketara wrote:
Realistically, I think Riots buff/nerf ratios are fairly 50/50, or at most like 60% nerf 40% buff. The issue is people notice nerfs more than buffs and tend to be more upset about nerfs than buffs, so even if it's 60/40, it looks like 80/20 unless you actually sit back and examine it objectively.
Also when you "nerf OP" then that just means there's an opening for a new OP strat that the designers haven't identified yet. By buffing the counter to an OP strat, you create ... 'balance'
e.g. back in the day when Twitch was mind-bogglingly OP but TF balanced him out with global slow+TP+stealth reveal+gold card stun
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
of course you have to nerf the old ops. who would get the new ops if the old ones are always op
|
United States47024 Posts
The problem is that Riot's relatively poor at distinguishing a champ being strong for any reason other than his kit being too strong.
In general they underestimate the effect of item/playstyle/systemic game mechanic changes.
|
when I think about Riot Balance I still always think about Yango's complaint about the GP/Noct/Udyr nerfs. If you look you consistently see Riot falling into that same trap over and over again.
2012 supports was a disgusting story of nerfing one support after another until Taric was completely unable to be delt with in lane, and then got gutted himself for it.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On September 17 2013 02:27 Flakes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2013 02:15 Ketara wrote:
Realistically, I think Riots buff/nerf ratios are fairly 50/50, or at most like 60% nerf 40% buff. The issue is people notice nerfs more than buffs and tend to be more upset about nerfs than buffs, so even if it's 60/40, it looks like 80/20 unless you actually sit back and examine it objectively.
Also when you "nerf OP" then that just means there's an opening for a new OP strat that the designers haven't identified yet. By buffing the counter to an OP strat, you create ... 'balance' e.g. back in the day when Twitch was mind-bogglingly OP but TF balanced him out with global slow+TP+stealth reveal+gold card stun
What, that doesn't make sense
Also, if people are complaining about Riot deciding what you can't play by nerfing that, imagine the whine when people would realize that they can only play thing that Riot allows them
|
They're probably going to nerf Ahri given the high pick/ban rate. Has nothing to do with anything else happening in the game coughryzesuckdickcough gotta take everythign in a vacuum!
|
On September 17 2013 02:39 Scip wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2013 02:27 Flakes wrote:On September 17 2013 02:15 Ketara wrote:
Realistically, I think Riots buff/nerf ratios are fairly 50/50, or at most like 60% nerf 40% buff. The issue is people notice nerfs more than buffs and tend to be more upset about nerfs than buffs, so even if it's 60/40, it looks like 80/20 unless you actually sit back and examine it objectively.
Also when you "nerf OP" then that just means there's an opening for a new OP strat that the designers haven't identified yet. By buffing the counter to an OP strat, you create ... 'balance' e.g. back in the day when Twitch was mind-bogglingly OP but TF balanced him out with global slow+TP+stealth reveal+gold card stun What, that doesn't make sense Also, if people are complaining about Riot deciding what you can't play by nerfing that, imagine the whine when people would realize that they can only play thing that Riot allows them
What doesn't make sense? I'm just saying that there's always going to be a 'most powerful' strategy in the game at any given time, unless you ensure that the counter to that strategy is also viable. If Riot wants to have control over the metagame, then they shouldn't nerf the most powerful strategy because then a new one will take its place that they may not have foreseen.
edit: thanks xes for a good recent example :D
|
I know it's early but I'm surprised we haven't seen more Lissandra, I was expecting her to be a break out at worlds. Of course we still have no idea what Dade plans to play.
|
United States47024 Posts
Flakes I think that's an incredibly shallow view of how the draft works.
There isn't ever a "most powerful strategy". There is always going to be a "strategy most suitable for what's strong in this version", but there will always be a counter-strategy that's good enough to be pick-able, it's just that counter-strategy will be less stable against everything else.
The main thing is there are pretty much no teams that are yet thinking of the draft on the level of "what beats the best strategy for this version". Even the best teams are still on the level of "what's the best strategy for this version". Hell, even in DotA, which has had a decade of people studying and learning about the game, the number of drafters that think about the game on that level are extremely scarce.
|
On September 17 2013 02:21 onlywonderboy wrote:Eh, Ryze was getting picked a lot before the nerfs. When teams sent him Top he would just shit on most melee champions. If not for Dade I wouldn't have been surprised if Ryze had a 0% pick rate at Worlds. Ryze is still viable if he gets fed, but even in soloq his laning phase is hell now. He didn't quite get Olaf'd, but Riot still nerfed him hard. Of course It's easy for these nerfs to overshadow things like mana cost reductions on Malz 
The way Ryze is designed, this is how he should be. He should need assistance getting to the mid/late game if his mid/late game are going to be as terrifying as they are. It was not ok for him to have a simple laning phase that turns into a monstrous late game.
I'm not saying that this is good champ design - but with his power curve, as far as I'm concerned, the nerf was required.
|
On September 17 2013 02:44 TheYango wrote:
Flakes I think that's an incredibly shallow view of how the draft works.
There isn't ever a "most powerful strategy". There is always going to be a "strategy most suitable for what's strong in this version", but there will always be a counter-strategy that's good enough to be pick-able, it's just that counter-strategy will be less stable against everything else.
The main thing is there are pretty much no teams that are yet thinking of the draft on the level of "what beats the best strategy for this version". Even the best teams are still on the level of "what's the best strategy for this version". Hell, even in DotA, which has had a decade of people studying and learning about the game, the number of drafters that think about the game on that level are extremely scarce.
Sorry I shoulda been more clear, 'most powerful' was in quotes to refer to what was popular among the pros and therefore what the community/Riot thinks is OP. Also I'm mostly just pointing out flaws in Riot's balance strategy rather than gamecrafting.
The patches with negligible nerfs/buffs aimed at changing the community opinion rather than fixing an imbalance strike me as interesting, but as far as creating a balanced game it really is better to just let the players (who have waaayyy more gametesting man-hours on their hands) figure out the meta themselves.
I think Worlds really could show that players care enough about finding the counters to certain metas, if given the time to research it, and that the triforce buff in fact threw a wrench into that process 
|
The best part about Season 3 has been the diversified champion pool for adcs. Almost every champion that fits the role has been played in the LCS at one point.
The overbuff of Triforce completely ruined that aspect just at the right moment for Worlds. Sad.
|
Meh. I think Assassin meta is real. And I think it was Riot's intention to make assassin meta.
|
On September 17 2013 02:56 cLutZ wrote:
Meh. I think Assassin meta is real. And I think it was Riot's intention to make assassin meta.
and so we pray to Lissandra to save us all.
|
I think the assassin meta is fine, since most mid assassins have some form of counterpick. Corki on the other hand seems too dominant in lane or mid game compared to every other ADC.
|
On September 17 2013 03:09 Shiznick wrote:
I think the assassin meta is fine, since most mid assassins have some form of counterpick. Corki on the other hand seems too dominant in lane or mid game compared to every other ADC.
and so it begins again
|
On September 17 2013 03:09 Shiznick wrote:
I think the assassin meta is fine, since most mid assassins have some form of counterpick. Corki on the other hand seems too dominant in lane or mid game compared to every other ADC.
The only reason corki looks so dominant is because his favorite item, trinity force, which is amazing on him (give him everything he wants) is brokenly strong right now... if you nerf trinity force corki will get nerfed along with it. When was the last time you saw adc corki not rush trinity?
|
I don't think Riot intends most of the things happening in the pro meta. I'll give them Corki.
|
for the record Corki is 4-4 with 2 bans, and for those of you wondering (I know you are) he got picked once by Mineski and once against Mineski so even eliminating them leaves him at 3-3
|
On September 17 2013 03:16 Slusher wrote:
for the record Corki is 4-4 with 2 bans, and for those of you wondering (I know you are) he got picked once by Mineski and once against Mineski so even eliminating them leaves him at 3-3
Don't forget GG.eu
That makes 2-2
Too small of a sample size to draw any conclusions
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
