|
On December 22 2013 17:18 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 17:09 FinestHour wrote:
dam league of bruisers is so much more fun then league of assassins It would be better if the 4 strongest bruisers right now weren't in the top 10 of least interactive. The only way they messed up is by making Mundo OP instead of Garen. That would have given us the ultimate in boring toplane.
What is considered to be the four strongest bruisers right now?
Is it Warwick, Renekton, Mundo and someone else? Forgive me for my ignorance but I'm truly clueless right now. Is the general trend for top laners these days is tanky bruisers with plenty of sustain?
|
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2013 18:13 Frudgey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 17:18 cLutZ wrote:On December 22 2013 17:09 FinestHour wrote:
dam league of bruisers is so much more fun then league of assassins It would be better if the 4 strongest bruisers right now weren't in the top 10 of least interactive. The only way they messed up is by making Mundo OP instead of Garen. That would have given us the ultimate in boring toplane. What is considered to be the four strongest bruisers right now? Is it Warwick, Renekton, Mundo and someone else? Forgive me for my ignorance but I'm truly clueless right now. Is the general trend for top laners these days is tanky bruisers with plenty of sustain?
Shyvana Mundo Renekton Rengar
|
On December 22 2013 18:13 Frudgey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 17:18 cLutZ wrote:On December 22 2013 17:09 FinestHour wrote:
dam league of bruisers is so much more fun then league of assassins It would be better if the 4 strongest bruisers right now weren't in the top 10 of least interactive. The only way they messed up is by making Mundo OP instead of Garen. That would have given us the ultimate in boring toplane. What is considered to be the four strongest bruisers right now? Is it Warwick, Renekton, Mundo and someone else? Forgive me for my ignorance but I'm truly clueless right now. Is the general trend for top laners these days is tanky bruisers with plenty of sustain?
WW's not considered very strong. His lategame is monster, but his early game has way too many problems for him to be a high value pick. Even in the GG v. XD.GG game it really showed. WW was helpless for the first like 15 minutes and would've been worthless if Gambit weren't able to give him the space to free farm for at least 5 straight minutes.
|
The only true melee adc that ever existed was gangplank around the end of s1.
|
On December 22 2013 18:24 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 18:13 Frudgey wrote:On December 22 2013 17:18 cLutZ wrote:On December 22 2013 17:09 FinestHour wrote:
dam league of bruisers is so much more fun then league of assassins It would be better if the 4 strongest bruisers right now weren't in the top 10 of least interactive. The only way they messed up is by making Mundo OP instead of Garen. That would have given us the ultimate in boring toplane. What is considered to be the four strongest bruisers right now? Is it Warwick, Renekton, Mundo and someone else? Forgive me for my ignorance but I'm truly clueless right now. Is the general trend for top laners these days is tanky bruisers with plenty of sustain? WW's not considered very strong. His lategame is monster, but his early game has way too many problems for him to be a high value pick. Even in the GG v. XD.GG game it really showed. WW was helpless for the first like 15 minutes and would've been worthless if Gambit weren't able to give him the space to free farm for at least 5 straight minutes.
By this I believe you mean if the team they were facing had more than 3 decent players on it.
|
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2013 19:04 wei2coolman wrote:
The only true melee adc that ever existed was gangplank around the end of s1.
Bruiser that was. Yi was pretty popular back when he was balanced(soon after remake), then they gutted him.
I think Warwick top is a sleeper OP actually. His only issue is no waveclear. His earlygame is fine.
|
Warwick has huge mana issues. Laning him top you're pretty much compelled to get chalice to keep up with stuff or you'll run oom fast vs all the immovable tops.
|
Finland33997 Posts
Doran Ring solves all of his mana issues and you can even start with it.
Warwick himself is an immovable top as well, I'm not sure why you'd even try to force anyone off the lane when you outscale them anyway and have perhaps the best gank support in the game.
|
On December 22 2013 18:01 Shikyo wrote: Mundo does jackshit after 12 seconds.
Is this a joke? Even supposing Mundo is worse after 12 seconds, the actual meat of a fight rarely lasts more than 10 seconds, and he does not do "jackshit."
Cleavers are comparable to Warwick's Q in damage (if slightly inferior due to max health vs current health, depending on the sitiuation), but apply a large slow. Burning agony is more than 2 sunfire capes worth of damage while giving a large amount of tenacity. And masochism gives a minimum of 100 AD (realistically quite a bit more than that). Mundo is manaless, and after a point the health costs don't mean squat (especially with season 4 masteries), whereas if you don't have a source of mana regen on Warwick, you're going to run out mana and won't be able to use his q in a prolonged fight after a point.
To me this is just straight up ignorance on your part, the amount of garbage you spew is starting to get intolerable.
Ryuu314 puts forth a better argument, but I'm not exactly sure I buy it. Even with Wit's End and his passive, Warwick has a lot more problems sticking to someone than Mundo does, especially if he gets slowed. So even if Warwick does more damage on paper, I'm not so sure that is the case in reality. I decided to look at their damage via autos, just to have something to compare.
My calculations (Mundo vs WW, only offensive item is Wit's End for both), before resists:
WW
AD: 117.5
Magic damage per auto: 90 (42 from wits, 48 from passive- assumed to be fully stacked for convenience)
Attack speed: 1.66 attacks/second (1.86 attacks/second with hungering strike up, 1.32 attacks/second with hungering strike down, up for 10/16 seconds with no CDR)
Total DPS- 344 damage/second
Mundo
AD: 110.23
Magic damage per auto: 42 (Wit's End)
Sadomasochism: 150 AD (for convenience- actual number if it is level 5, 100-200)
Attack speed: 1.19 attacks/second
Total DPS- 310 damage/second, 359 DPS with sadomasochism, 181 with no sadomasochism (sadomasochism is up 5 out of every 7 seconds- with 20% CDR, it goes down to 5 out of every 5.6 seconds- but I'm not going to include any CDR in this)
So that's just from autos. A lot closer than I expected, although my 50% health assumption is probably a bit generous to Mundo. One could also argue Mundo is rarely going to get Wit's End these days, but the gap is not that large. That being said, if you throw in burning agony, I don't see how Warwick can finish ahead in sustained damage, provided Mundo lands his cleavers. Cooldown on cleavers is 4 seconds vs Warwick's 6 for hungering strike, so even if cleavers do less damage, so long as you hit them their damage output is quite comparable (depends on the target's health, current health, and resists too- hard to make a good comparison here, Warwick's Q is better against tanks with a lot of max health in certain situations, but not enough to offset the cooldown difference over the course of many cleavers and hungering strikes against an "average" target).
I guess if you count WW's ult it bumps his DPS up to 736 for 1.5 seconds, which is a lot. But there's no guarantee you get all of that damage, so it probably isn't too different from his normal DPS if it gets interrupted. I suppose you could argue Warwick can get 40% CDR, while Mundo is going to almost certainly stop at 20% (not counting elixirs), so the difference in Q damage against tanks with a lot of health and the 100% uptime on his attack speed buff pushes Warwick closer or even ahead (though the attack speed buff having 100% uptime is only a 40 DPS increase, approximately).
I'm not super convinced Warwick does more sustained damage at any rate. In absolutely ideal conditions probably, but in a real situation I can easily imagine Warwick suffering from CC a lot more. And Mundo's DPS goes up quite a bit if his burning agony is on multiple targets.
At any rate, the real weaknesses of Warwick (when laning) are his ability to do anything pre-6 is close to zero, he's largely limited by mana, and it is hard to roam and accomplish anything because your pushing power is slightly better than Trundle's- aka, close to nonexistent. Also, there's little room to outplay the opposing laner, unless they're criminally stupid when they know your jungler (or mid) is nearby. And he sucks in 1v2 situations.
|
Wouldn't Tear of the Goddess completely solve all kinds of mana issues WW has in lane? Upgrading it to Muramana later would be a significant damage boost to both his ultimate and Q.
|
have a weak early game? better buy a tear of the goddess! that will help.
|
the mana problems arent that bad but lack of wave clear is horrible
|
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2013 20:12 zer0das wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 18:01 Shikyo wrote: Mundo does jackshit after 12 seconds. Is this a joke? Even supposing Mundo is worse after 12 seconds, the actual meat of a fight rarely lasts more than 10 seconds, and he does not do "jackshit." Cleavers are comparable to Warwick's Q in damage (if slightly inferior due to max health vs current health, depending on the sitiuation), but apply a large slow. Burning agony is more than 2 sunfire capes worth of damage while giving a large amount of tenacity. And masochism gives a minimum of 100 AD (realistically quite a bit more than that). Mundo is manaless, and after a point the health costs don't mean squat (especially with season 4 masteries), whereas if you don't have a source of mana regen on Warwick, you're going to run out mana and won't be able to use his q in a prolonged fight after a point. To me this is just straight up ignorance on your part, the amount of garbage you spew is starting to get intolerable. Ryuu314 puts forth a better argument, but I'm not exactly sure I buy it. Even with Wit's End and his passive, Warwick has a lot more problems sticking to someone than Mundo does, especially if he gets slowed. So even if Warwick does more damage on paper, I'm not so sure that is the case in reality. I decided to look at their damage via autos, just to have something to compare. My calculations (Mundo vs WW, only offensive item is Wit's End for both), before resists: WW AD: 117.5 Magic damage per auto: 90 (42 from wits, 48 from passive- assumed to be fully stacked for convenience) Attack speed: 1.86 attacks/second Total DPS- 386 damage/second Mundo AD: 110.23 Magic damage per auto: 42 (Wit's End) Sadomasochism: 150 AD (for convenience- actual number if it is level 5, 100-200) Attack speed: 1.19 attacks/second Total DPS- average of 310 DPS, 359 damage/second with sadomasochism, 181 with no sadomasochism (sadomasochism is up 5 out of every 7 seconds- with 20% CDR, it goes down to 5 out of every 5.6 seconds- but I'm not going to include any CDR in this) So that's just from autos. A lot closer than I expected, although my 50% health assumption is probably a bit generous to Mundo. One could also argue Mundo is rarely going to get Wit's End these days, but the gap is not that large. That being said, if you throw in burning agony, I don't see how Warwick can finish ahead in sustained damage, provided Mundo lands his cleavers. Cooldown on cleavers is 4 seconds vs Warwick's 6 for hungering strike, so even if cleavers do less damage, so long as you hit them their damage output is quite comparable (depends on the target's health, current health, and resists too- hard to make a good comparison here, Warwick's Q is better against tanks with a lot of max health in certain situations, but not enough to offset the cooldown difference over the course of many cleavers and hungering strikes against an "average" target). I guess if you count WW's ult it bumps his DPS up to 736 for 1.5 seconds, which is a lot. But there's no guarantee you get all of that damage, so it probably isn't too different from his normal DPS if it gets interrupted. I suppose you could argue Warwick can get 40% CDR, while Mundo is going to almost certainly stop at 20% (not counting elixirs), so the difference in Q damage against tanks with a lot of health pushes Warwick closer or even ahead. I'm not super convinced Warwick does more sustained damage at any rate. In absolutely ideal conditions probably, but in a real situation I can easily imagine Warwick suffering from CC a lot more. And Mundo's DPS goes up quite a bit if his burning agony is on multiple targets. At any rate, the real weaknesses of Warwick (when laning) are his ability to do anything pre-6 is close to zero, he's largely limited by mana, and it is hard to roam and accomplish anything because your pushing power is slightly better than Trundle's- aka, close to nonexistent. Also, there's little room to outplay the opposing laner, unless they're criminally stupid when they know your jungler (or mid) is nearby. And he sucks in 1v2 situations.
Not sure why we talk about ults but yeah. Mundo's from my experience very easy to just focus down and doesn't accomplish much without ult. WW isn't that good when an enemy isn't below 50% and a beast when an enemy is, so you could argue he requires his team to do something unless he wants to blow his ult to a squishy to get the buff.
WW's sustain is way, way way way way higher than Mundo's when Mundo has no ult, I don't see how this would even be arguable, even if their damage would be comparable(which it's not especially when the opponent enters the lower hp range where he is actually in danger of dying). It also isn't reasonable to expect to hit every cleaver unless you're like, 1v1ing with a Warwick(and WW wins that fight with no contest by the way, Mundo has to pop ult and run away).
WW also gives his team a permanent 40% aspd aura. However, the main thing is that it really is easy to bring Mundo down when his ult is down because his sustain really is almost nonexistent whereas Warwick's is insane. Warwick's Q also is much higher damage than Mundo's Cleaver at kill ranges, aka WW can use his as a finisher.
In my opinion, the main strenghts of Mundo are the diving ability / movespeed while being almost unkillable with the ultimate(and CC reduction of course). However, I don't see him as a threatening champion at all when he has no ultimate.
WW's main problem indeed is waveclear, it has nothing to do with his teamfighting or lack of utility or anything else, in my opinion.
As I said earlier, one Doran's Ring is enough to solve all your mana problems for the whole game.
|
On December 22 2013 20:54 kongoline wrote:
the mana problems arent that bad but lack of wave clear is horrible
nasus's wave clear is horrible but he is still viable.
half warwicks lane problems would be solved if he ran teleport. im not saying he would be a big time pick with teleport, but the logical reasons for getting teleport are all things warwick wants.
|
Finland33997 Posts
Ravenous Hydra could be a good idea for Warwick, flat AD has synergy with attack speed, he needs the waveclear, it procs with his ult which can be hilarious if multiple targets get Annie stunned or something, and he can use the activate after ult for a nice combo. The ult's high AD ratio also is good for it.
I should give it a try.
|
On December 22 2013 21:04 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 20:54 kongoline wrote:
the mana problems arent that bad but lack of wave clear is horrible nasus's wave clear is horrible but he is still viable. half warwicks lane problems would be solved if he ran teleport. im not saying he would be a big time pick with teleport, but the logical reasons for getting teleport are all things warwick wants.
Nasus' wave clear is miles better than wazza's. Spirit fire alone is enough, not to mention siphoning strike, which basically acts as a low cool down execute.
|
honestly they just need to make all his damage physical, half his damage being magic is literally a 2011 rito idea. loads of champs in the same boat had their damages changed to be more logical. maybe lower his ult mana cost to 100 at all ranks because thats what all the cool kids have, and take 5-10 mana off the cost of his Q to put it inline with other champs.
warwick isnt far off being fine, he just hasnt had the round of buffs that riot calls a remake that loads of other champs have had, so hes a bit outclassed at the moment. hes not a particularly fun champ but thats a different discussion all together.
|
On December 22 2013 21:02 Shikyo wrote:WW's sustain is way, way way way way higher than Mundo's when Mundo has no ult, I don't see how this would even be arguable,
That was never argued, this is intrinsically obvious. It has nothing to do with damage output though.
On December 22 2013 21:02 Shikyo wrote:even if their damage would be comparable(which it's not especially when the opponent enters the lower hp range where he is actually in danger of dying). It also isn't reasonable to expect to hit every cleaver. Warwick's Q also is much higher damage than Mundo's Cleaver at kill ranges, aka WW can use his as a finisher.
Against ADCs and AP carries, cleavers and hungering strike are doing nearly identical damage when they're low on health if they haven't built any health items (so 1800-2000 max health)- it favors Warwick slightly, but given the cooldowns Mundo is doing more damage. At full health, a cleaver does more damage to an AD or AP carry (if they have 1800 max health, a cleaver is doing 450 damage, substantially more than Warwick's hungering strike). And cleavers have a substantially lower cooldown.
Against tanks with a large max health, yes, Warwick does more damage against a low current health tank. That is one case. A tank with 4000 max health will take 640 magic damage from a hungering strike, even if they're at 1000 health. But Mundo can chuck out 1.5 cleavers in the same time, so that's still 420 magic damage, which is not that far off. Also consider a cleaver against a full health tank with 4000 health hits for 1000 damage. Given who the priority targets are, I would argue Mundo's cleavers do more damage to the targets who matter. And even against targets that tend to favor Warwick, the difference is not that large.
Hitting a high percentage of cleavers when pursuing a target is not uncommon. Once you get on top of someone, chaining them together is not difficult (contrary to the inhouse fail videos floating around).
On December 22 2013 21:02 Shikyo wrote:WW also gives his team a permanent 40% aspd aura. However, the main thing is that it really is easy to bring Mundo down when his ult is down because his sustain really is almost nonexistent whereas Warwick's is insane.
Sustain is largely irrelevant to your damage output, provided you are not dying and you aren't being forced to flee. Being able to choose when you get your health back is largely a positive (provided you are not ignited and do not have deadly wounds applied). You're also ignoring itemization- Warmogs is fairly core to Mundo and coupled with his passive and everything else, his health regen even without his ult is nothing to sneeze at.
On December 22 2013 21:02 Shikyo wrote:As I said earlier, one Doran's Ring is enough to solve all your mana problems for the whole game.
This is patently untrue. Please stop talking out of your ass.
|
i would say at this point warmoggs isnt really a core mundo item, just because it has the same passive as his passive doesnt make it any better for him than for any other champ.
|
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2013 21:37 zer0das wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 21:02 Shikyo wrote:As I said earlier, one Doran's Ring is enough to solve all your mana problems for the whole game. This is patently untrue. Please stop talking out of your ass.
Well, that's what my experience tells me. As you'll be lasthitting a lot / getting numerous minion skills, you really shouldn't have any significant mana trouble especially after your glacial.
BTW You suggesting Warmogs as core on Mundo makes me question your credibility. It's a ultralategame luxury item and even then I see no reason to build it.
At this point I really am not quite sure what we are even arguing about, but yes higher sustain makes you able to stay in fight for a longer time. That is also the reason why building full DPS on melees isn't optimal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
