EPT[Patch 3.13] Heimer Rework General Discussion - Page 92
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On November 06 2013 08:48 Ketara wrote: Right. Havoc isn't as good on autoattackers as it is on casters, because it doesn't increase your autoattack damage all that much. But it's still better than everything else late game, and is at least passably decent early-mid game for autos. Sunder is also really good, but you don't really compare Havoc to Sunder because you're almost always getting both. You compare Havoc to Brute Force and Fury, typically. For more spellcastery champions, especially AP's, Havoc is just hands down the best thing in the tree. Literally this is the fourth or fifth time we've been over this. I don't want to do it again. And now they're adding two single point masteries that, assuming you can reliably get their stacks up, are 5 times as efficient? Pretty ridic. Personally I like the direction they're going with masteries. Currently, masteries don't seem very impactful outside of a few specific masteries. With stronger individual masteries you're likely to get more customization. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Alzadar
Canada5009 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On November 06 2013 08:55 TheYango wrote: The deal-breaker for me, in addition to the previously discussed duration issue, is whether AoE spells proc the buff per target. and whether on-hit spells trigger both passives. If AoE spells only proc the buff once for a single cast, then the mastery isn't going to be all that worth it on, say, Caitlyn, Ashe, or Sivir, because they simply won't ever have more than one instance of the buff, that will probably fall off when their nuke is on CD. 1% damage half the time is worse than 0.66% damage all the time. There are some champions it's just not going to be good on. Caitlyn and Ashe I think are good examples. There are others where it's going to be crazy amazing, and for most it's probably going to be decent but not spectacular compared to some of the other options (basically everything got a buff) The duration and things like on-hits and AoE are big deals though. I'd be surprised if an AoE spell gave more than one charge. The biggest difference in the mastery trees is that the optimum build is going to be different for different champions in the same role now. Each ADC's masteries are going to be slightly different whereas in S3 you could just make one 21/9 page and say fuck it, even if there were some fringe cases where it's not perfect. | ||
|
thenexusp
United States3721 Posts
On November 06 2013 08:55 TheYango wrote: The deal-breaker for me, in addition to the previously discussed duration issue, is whether AoE spells proc the buff per target. and whether on-hit spells trigger both passives. If AoE spells only proc the buff once for a single cast, then the mastery isn't going to be all that worth it on, say, Caitlyn, Ashe, or Sivir, because they simply won't ever have more than one instance of the buff, that will probably fall off when their nuke is on CD. 1% damage half the time is worse than 0.66% damage all the time. The mastery does say "This cannot be trigger more than once per second" so I'm guessing you're only proccing it once per spell cast, unfortunately. I wish it said how long the buff duration was, as it makes a difference. It also makes it sound that DoTs do apply the buff multiple times. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On November 06 2013 08:48 Ketara wrote: And now they're adding two single point masteries that, assuming you can reliably get their stacks up, are 5 times as efficient? Technically they're not 5x as efficient. They're 2.5x as efficient at 3 stacks of both. Havoc is 0.66% spell damage and autoattack damage. Spell Weaving is 3% spell damage at max stacks and Blade Weaving is 3% autoattack damage at max stacks. That's 2 points for 5x the effectiveness of 1 point Havoc (since Havoc affects both as one point) which means that per point they're 2.5x as effective (assuming you stay at max stacks). | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
On November 06 2013 08:47 TheYango wrote: Honestly, I disagree at calling it the best mastery in the tree, but Cheep you made yourself wrong too by calling it objectively shit. It's not bad, but it's not the best mastery in the tree. For example, on any champ that does entirely physical damage, the first rank of Sunder is more damage unless the target you're hitting has 200+ armor *after* % pen has applied. Which never happens because if they got that much armor, you bought Last Whisper long before they hit 200 armor. it's pretty shit assuming you go for 21 points in offense u need to get 9 points first of all, so saying havoc is better than the first 9 points anything in the first three tiers is already stupid lol brute force is more useful than havoc early 100%, which makes it better than havoc lethality and frenzy are both better and get increasingly better as the game goes on executioner is better for obvious reasons so it comes down to if havoc is better than fury or sorcery as you need to pump some points to go past tier 3 to reach the final 21 points so ok lets say havoc is better than fury or sorcery: out of the 21 points you've allocated into the offensive tree, the three points in havoc are the three that you put in because you have no choice - its either havoc or fury/sorcery to reach 21. so its better than 2 tier 1 masteries and worse than every thing else how is that not shit? hell i'd take destruction over one of the havoc points in some cases too it's less shit when you do a comparable look at offensive tree for ap champs but i already noted that its not as bad for ap as it is for ad, but regardless, its a very very lackluster mastery; the point is moot for aps since to reach 21 offensive on pure ap champs you'll have to pretty much ignore all ad masteries and put all ap + havoc so its not like theres an alternative and if you're playing a hybrid champ havoc isnt even close to the top of the list on what you'd allocate your 21 points to | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
But they'll still be ridiculous on Varus and Kennen, who I have been playing. Hooray! | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
It's obviously better for melees, but melees still rarely buy enough crit for it to actually be better than Havoc (you need 1 or more major crit items still for it to be better, which melees don't buy). Plus it has zero value for champs that don't buy crit. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:02 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: it's pretty shit assuming you go for 21 points in offense u need to get 9 points first of all, so saying havoc is better than anything in the first three tiers is already stupid lol brute force is more useful than havoc early 100%, which makes it better than havoc lethality and frenzy are both better and get increasingly better as the game goes on executioner is better for obvious reasons so it comes down to if havoc is better than fury or sorcery as you need to pump some points to go past tier 3 to reach the final 21 points so ok lets say havoc is better than fury or sorcery: out of the 21 points you've allocated into the offensive tree, the three points in havoc are the three that you put in because you have no choice - its either havoc or fury/sorcery to reach 21. so its better than 2 tier 1 masteries and worse than every thing else how is that not shit? it's less shit when you do a comparable look at offensive tree for ap champs but i already noted that its not as bad for ap as it is for ad, but regardless, its a very very lackluster mastery; the point is moot for aps since to reach 21 offensive on pure ap champs you'll have to pretty much ignore all ad masteries and put all ap + havoc so its not like theres an alternative Actually, it's better than Lethality. Going back to our ADC example, 55% crit and IE with IE/PD means you've got basically +82.5% damage per auto average on crits. So your attacks are, on average, doing 182.5% damage, meaning one point of Havoc gives you +1.2% damage per auto. With 55% crit one point of Lethality is giving you on average +1.3% damage per auto. This is then only applying to your autoattacks. The difference is so small that as basically long as you cast one spell in a fight ever, Havoc added more damage than Lethality. Or I could just use your own logic and say that Havoc helps early game and Lethality does not so it's default better. C'mon Cheep, I know you graduated highschool, do your homework. | ||
|
Alzadar
Canada5009 Posts
| ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:10 TheYango wrote: Lethality is actually not better than Havoc. 1.33% damage vs 5% crit damage. Assuming you have IE, 5% crit damage is a 3.3% damage increase at 100% crit, meaning you need 40% crit for it to be better than Havoc. WIthout IE, 5% crit damage is 5% damage increase at 100% crit meaning you need 27% crit chance for it to be better than Havoc. So Lethality has far less consistent power over the game and is usually not better than Havoc. It's obviously better for melees, but melees still rarely buy enough crit for it to actually be better than Havoc (you need 1 or more major crit items still for it to be better, which melees don't buy). Plus it has zero value for champs that don't buy crit.  why did you link liquipedia lethality is better than havoc by the mere merit that you need it to get to frenzy, so its non negotiable its silly to compare 1 to 1 points, you should only compare it to the alternatives - you cant magically trade 2 points of lethality for 2 points of havoc while keeping frenzy, so unless you're saying 2 pts of lethality + 1 points of frenzy < 3 points of havoc, its irrelevant what the 1 to 1 comparison between havoc and lethality is | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Havoc is a mastery point that is mediocre for everyone, so everyone usually takes a point or two in it. On the other hand, things like Sunder have zero value for many champs so they never take it but others always take it. Which one is "better"? Or rather, is there a way that you can assess one as being "better" that actually has practical meaning? You can't. So really, the only thing that we can say is based on how Havoc was used in S3 as a mastery, there are some champs that might like Blade/Spell Weaving as masteries in S4, depending on how the rest of the numbers turn out. Which, isn't really saying anything. Basically Ketara overreacted to a cool mastery that looks cool, and you jumped on him to argue about something that's pretty much impossible to actually argue about in a meaningful way. | ||
|
ShaLLoW[baY]
Canada12499 Posts
| ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:15 TheYango wrote: Honestly this discussion is asinine solely based on the fact that there's zero means to assessing mastery points' worth in a vacuum. Havoc is a mastery point that is mediocre for everyone, so everyone usually takes a point or two in it. On the other hand, things like Sunder have zero value for many champs so they never take it but others always take it. Which one is "better"? thats dodging the issue. think about it this way then - no one is pumping any points into the tree to get to havoc, whereas lots of champs will pump points into the tree to get to sunder, or executioner, or even brute force havoc is shit because you only get it when you have no other options, you're never getting havoc for the sake of getting havoc, whereas you're getting a lot of other mastery points for the sake of getting weapon expertise/brute force or veteran's scars/runic affinity/mastermind for comparable levels in other trees is it the worst mastery point? ofc not. is it remotely close to the best point? hell no, which is simply yet another case of ketara spouting nonsense and passing it off as gospel,. all the while doing some passive aggressive martyr card | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:15 TheYango wrote: Honestly this discussion is asinine solely based on the fact that there's zero means to assessing mastery points' worth in a vacuum. Havoc is a mastery point that is mediocre for everyone, so everyone usually takes a point or two in it. On the other hand, things like Sunder have zero value for many champs so they never take it but others always take it. Which one is "better"? Or rather, is there a way that you can assess one as being "better" that actually has practical meaning? You can assess that it's better for a specific champion in a specific situation. I mean, on my ADC mastery pages I only take 2 points in Havoc generally (take Destruction instead of the third point). I would take the third point instead of Frenzy but I can't because Frenzy is crappofirsttier. But as a general statement, anybody who think it's a trash-tier or noobtrap or whatever mastery is fairly wrong. And there are a lot of people who think that way, you see a lot of people who take things like Mental Force over it on APs, which is so bad I don't even. Soniv did that on all his APs, btw. CALLIN U OUT SONIV And Cheep, you are a troll and I don't know how you don't get banned for the things you post. | ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:20 Ketara wrote: But as a general statement, anybody who think it's a trash-tier or noobtrap or whatever mastery is fairly wrong. And there are a lot of people who think that way, you see a lot of people who take things like Mental Force over it on APs, which is so bad I don't even. stupid argument yet again because to reach 21 you need both mental force and havoc if you dont use the ad side, you're not choosing one over the other | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
On November 06 2013 09:21 TheYango wrote: So what practical implication is there to a game whether or not I'm putting points in Offense "for" a particular mastery (whatever that means)? There is none--the only thing that matters is your resultant mastery page having the highest possible effectiveness. yea i agree and you can certainly look at it that way but framed in that perspective its still asinine to proclaim havoc as the best mastery point in the offense tree by your logic, in order to have the best resultant tree, you can logically proclaim either the 21st point, the 9th point, or any of the first 4 points as the most important mastery points in the offense tree in no universe is havoc even close to being considered in contention for the best point in the offense tree | ||
| ||
