On January 28 2014 02:01 Sandster wrote: Not sure why you were quoting me the vs Vlad matchup, but I mean you Q Garen while he's in range, and use W before he hits you so that your first auto on each other is a silence/stun, and you attack him through the spin and then E+autos+Q and E away after silence ends. If you're behind you obviously can't do this.
Renek scales better than Garen in the sense that it's much easier to cc Garen. If he builds tanky then his burst and damage is lower than Renek's, and if he builds damage then he's much easier to kill.
I dunno about your latter points, 6s duration 30% CC+damage reduction is no easy task to kill, even building some damage. And when building tanky, on a 2k HP target at half health Demacian Justice is a 900 magic damage nuke, that's no joke either.
I don't like playing Garen just cause I'm super bad at eyeballing the ultimate damage, I either way overkill or I barely miss it. Give me true damage with kill indicator like Cho please.
One of the world’s hottest videogames, “League of Legends,” is disclosing a big jump in the number of customers playing its game each day.
Riot Games, of Santa Monica, Calif., said it now counts more than 27 million gamers playing “League of Legends” each day, more than double the 12 million it counted in October 2012. The company also said it has counted peaks of over 7.5 million customers playing the game at the same time each day, up 50% from the 5 million the company counted in March of last year.
On January 28 2014 01:51 Alaric wrote: I guess what he means is that since Renek keeps momentum during his Q, if you start running away when Garen runs to you, Q while he's in the AoE then press W you can activate it before the silence?
yeah but you dont fire q until renek is close and trying to last hit the difference is ive been playing garen vs renek constantly this seaosn and the other guy probably played against garen once last season
On January 28 2014 02:01 Sandster wrote: Not sure why you were quoting me the vs Vlad matchup, but I mean you Q Garen while he's in range, and use W before he hits you so that your first auto on each other is a silence/stun, and you attack him through the spin and then E+autos+Q and E away after silence ends. Pre-activating W isn't actually all important if you're going for a full rotation since using it after being un-silenced as an auto-attack cancel is higher burst; it's just important to get the initial Q beforehand so you get a second one back sooner. If you're behind you obviously can't do this.
Renek scales better than Garen in the sense that it's much easier to cc Garen. If he builds tanky then his burst and damage is lower than Renek's, and if he builds damage then he's much easier to kill.
I quoted the vs vlad matchup because you made the comparision between vlad pool and renek e being shorter but ignored garen q being shorter than renek E when the other guy used the exact same argument in how vlad beats renek (pool vs his e) the irony escaped you apparently.
as for your theorycraft theres a lot of assumptions you're making which is mostly that garens gong to run in with Q then tank your Q and somehow get W'd before his Q goes off you can wait for him to Q a creep wave, Q in then run away again when he activates W (if close to tower he can't E in to chase, if not close to tower trying to Q garen in the middle of a wave will push it). Definitely renek can avoid your Q with E but you can only do it half the time.
as for lategame garens 20% bonus MR/Armour scaling and 30% 6 second reduction means he's probably the best hard scaling tank in the game (maybe malphite vs armour) and his burst is a lot higher than renek because of how much damage ult does (1k+ after level 16)
his sustianed damage is a lot lower, for sure Garens AD scaling is 4.7 AD and reneks is 4.1 +.4/.75/.45 depending on what empowered attacks you use and if you use E to gap close thorugh someone and not your main focus -0.9 AD scaling, so they are similar in that respect
On January 27 2014 23:22 Slayer91 wrote: no, not being a baddie is the counter to not getting tower dove 3 times in a row. spirit fire leads to pushing and pushing leads to ganking and ganking leads to the black and white side.
On January 27 2014 21:14 mr_tolkien wrote:
On January 27 2014 21:11 Sponkz wrote:
On January 27 2014 21:03 Scip wrote: It's kinda a self-own, because only a psycho like Sponkz would know what Ritalin even is :D
a good fucking joke though. I'd go ADHD for a week just to be able to make it
And the thousands and thousands of children given ritalin, despite not having ADHD or ADD.
Well yeah, we're more talking about how you still didn't recover from it.
User was warned for this post
What's going on here? First sponkz makes really weak and uninspired insults aimed towards me, and then Tolkien makes a really weak and uninspired insult towards sponkz and gets warned, and then scip goes crazy? unless sponkz is really mentally ill, in that case it would explain his something something bad plays
On January 27 2014 21:22 Scip wrote: You are tearing my fucking heart apart guys, I wish we could have a group skype chat where you wouldn't try to rip each other's dicks off at every time you are online at the same time. This is more to you tolki right now, it woulda been a fine joke, if not for the fact that nobody can fucking tell just how serious you are
Do I need to read the Skype chat to get some sweet drama? also if you mean ripping each other dicks off in a sexual way, hot.
I think the friction comes from Tolkien being self-righteous and sponkz having an anti bully complex the friction can only be cured by getting hot and sweaty and plenty of lubricant
On January 27 2014 23:19 Slayer91 wrote: Anyone here who's good at editing and all that? Need to make a clip and post on reddit. Epic Kayle ult by scip, ulting a full health orianna while someone died right next to him. Might not have the replay - Don't PM me.
wat
I meant in the EUW inhouse thread I mean I can browse r/wtf just easier than i can browse r/aww i don't know how you're trying to disgust me
the 2nd part was scip highlight reel of all the times he failed ult last night (in bed)
Can someone explain to me why exactly the tower changes were bad? I am not supporting it, just curious as to why the changes are considered so bad. It seems that Riot wanted to make adc/support toplane/midgame less attractive, and it seems that the patch achieved just that. If it's "inelegant", what would be a better alternative?
On January 28 2014 02:43 NeedsmoreCELLTECH wrote: Can someone explain to me why exactly the tower changes were bad? I am not supporting it, just curious as to why the changes are considered so bad. It seems that Riot wanted to make adc/support toplane/midgame less attractive, and it seems that the patch achieved just that. If it's "inelegant", what would be a better alternative?
1) its unintuitive and brute forced 2) it crushes anything that doesn't conform with Riots idea of the meta instead of letting the scene figure out how it wants to play 3) if you want to force the duo bot you can do it through other means like making baron more important early game so that if you swap your duo to top you lose dragon and it costs you. 4) It punishes top and mid lane. You cant push as hard on a tower if the other side roams because of giant arbitrary dmg reductions. 5) it hasn't actually done anything. We have still seen duo's top in almost every single pro game since the patch.
On January 28 2014 02:45 Slayer91 wrote: any time riot changes anythin lots of people whine its just the nature of change people who like the changes dont say anything
while this isn't wrong, there is a valid argument for why these tower changes in particular are a negative departure from riot's professed balance goals. the post above mine is a decent summation
IMO the problem isn't that dragon doesn't reward enough, its that the duo lane can't take it easily enough earlygame. You basically have to back even if you get it uncontested. Some "reward" indeed.
On January 28 2014 03:03 cLutZ wrote: IMO the problem isn't that dragon doesn't reward enough, its that the duo lane can't take it easily enough earlygame. You basically have to back even if you get it uncontested. Some "reward" indeed.
wat?You can do dragon without getting hit once.It just has infinity hp.Also it gives very little gold the 1 wave you lose is same gold as it lol.
On January 28 2014 02:43 NeedsmoreCELLTECH wrote: Can someone explain to me why exactly the tower changes were bad? I am not supporting it, just curious as to why the changes are considered so bad. It seems that Riot wanted to make adc/support toplane/midgame less attractive, and it seems that the patch achieved just that. If it's "inelegant", what would be a better alternative?
1) its unintuitive and brute forced 2) it crushes anything that doesn't conform with Riots idea of the meta instead of letting the scene figure out how it wants to play 3) if you want to force the duo bot you can do it through other means like making baron more important early game so that if you swap your duo to top you lose dragon and it costs you. 4) It punishes top and mid lane. You cant push as hard on a tower if the other side roams because of giant arbitrary dmg reductions. 5) it hasn't actually done anything. We have still seen duo's top in almost every single pro game since the patch.
On January 28 2014 02:45 Slayer91 wrote: any time riot changes anythin lots of people whine its just the nature of change people who like the changes dont say anything
while this isn't wrong, there is a valid argument for why these tower changes in particular are a negative departure from riot's professed balance goals. the post above mine is a decent summation
Okay, this is stupid for a number of reasons.
1 - Saying something is "unintuitive and brute forced" is subjective. How it is any more or less unintuitive than towers having bonus armor the first 8 minutes of the game is beyond me.
2 - "crushes anything that doesn't conform with Riots idea of the meta" is extremely hyperbolic to the point of being ridiculous. This is the kind of idiotic statement that comes up for some change or other in every patch. The defense of top and middle outer towers have hardly changed at all, only the bot lane tower has really changed, and yet this is crushing 1984 style conformity. Get over yourself.
3 - This point is actually valid, and is the only reasonable point I've heard for this tower change argument.
4 - It doesn't punish top and mid lane, because if you'd actually look at the math behind the changes you'd see that top and middle tower are NOT significantly harder to kill. Have you been playing the game since the patch? Do you think towers are harder to kill? I haven't noticed them being harder to kill. The math supports them not being harder to kill.
5 - LCS isn't even playing on the patch yet, so of course it hasn't done anything.
And re: Kyrie. I really wish people would stop trying to justify themselves calling Riot bad by saying what Riot is doing is against the goals of Riot. It's like you've magically split the company into two distinct entities. There's your Riot which knows what it's doing and is this great company that you love to reference as upholding the amazing game that is League of Legends, and then there's the other Riot that's this moron who shits all over everything you love.
There's only one Riot. If they make a decision to do something, it's in line with what their balance goals are. If it's contrary to something they said 6 months ago, that doesn't mean they're some schizophrenic teenager angsting around, it means that they changed their mind about what they said 6 months ago.
On January 28 2014 03:03 cLutZ wrote: IMO the problem isn't that dragon doesn't reward enough, its that the duo lane can't take it easily enough earlygame. You basically have to back even if you get it uncontested. Some "reward" indeed.
I definitely think that the Dragon at early levels is pretty underwhelming right now and before this weekend, I'd have probably been in the 'just buff dragon reward' boat, but the more I think about it, the more I'm not sure.
Take the DIG/CLG game this past weekend. This is just some thought and I understand that CLG severely screwed up their early game at the blue buff, but imagine that game if the Dragon they took immediately after that still gave full rewards. No point to keep watching, unless you're a masochist.
I'm still not a fan of the tower changes, but I'm not sure that just outright buffing dragon gold is the right solution. I think we need to give it some more time. If we see any kind of 2v1 lanes dying off, then reverting the dragon gold and removing the buff might be the way to go, just so strategies can be reintroduced to the game. I don't know if just buffing dragon gold is the right long term solution, though.
EDIT: Re-read your comment, realized that I completely misread it. Not going to change post, though.
One of the world’s hottest videogames, “League of Legends,” is disclosing a big jump in the number of customers playing its game each day.
Riot Games, of Santa Monica, Calif., said it now counts more than 27 million gamers playing “League of Legends” each day, more than double the 12 million it counted in October 2012. The company also said it has counted peaks of over 7.5 million customers playing the game at the same time each day, up 50% from the 5 million the company counted in March of last year.
On January 28 2014 02:43 NeedsmoreCELLTECH wrote: Can someone explain to me why exactly the tower changes were bad? I am not supporting it, just curious as to why the changes are considered so bad. It seems that Riot wanted to make adc/support toplane/midgame less attractive, and it seems that the patch achieved just that. If it's "inelegant", what would be a better alternative?
1) its unintuitive and brute forced 2) it crushes anything that doesn't conform with Riots idea of the meta instead of letting the scene figure out how it wants to play 3) if you want to force the duo bot you can do it through other means like making baron more important early game so that if you swap your duo to top you lose dragon and it costs you. 4) It punishes top and mid lane. You cant push as hard on a tower if the other side roams because of giant arbitrary dmg reductions. 5) it hasn't actually done anything. We have still seen duo's top in almost every single pro game since the patch.
On January 28 2014 02:45 Slayer91 wrote: any time riot changes anythin lots of people whine its just the nature of change people who like the changes dont say anything
while this isn't wrong, there is a valid argument for why these tower changes in particular are a negative departure from riot's professed balance goals. the post above mine is a decent summation
Okay, this is stupid for a number of reasons.
1 - Saying something is "unintuitive and brute forced" is subjective. How it is any more or less unintuitive than towers having bonus armor the first 8 minutes of the game is beyond me.
2 - "crushes anything that doesn't conform with Riots idea of the meta" is extremely hyperbolic to the point of being ridiculous. This is the kind of idiotic statement that comes up for some change or other in every patch. The defense of top and middle outer towers have hardly changed at all, only the bot lane tower has really changed, and yet this is crushing 1984 style conformity. Get over yourself.
3 - This point is actually valid, and is the only reasonable point I've heard for this tower change argument.
4 - It doesn't punish top and mid lane, because if you'd actually look at the math behind the changes you'd see that top and middle tower are NOT significantly harder to kill. Have you been playing the game since the patch? Do you think towers are harder to kill? I haven't noticed them being harder to kill. The math supports them not being harder to kill.
5 - LCS isn't even playing on the patch yet, so of course it hasn't done anything.
And re: Kyrie. I really wish people would stop trying to justify themselves calling Riot bad by saying what Riot is doing is against the goals of Riot. It's like you've magically split the company into two distinct entities. There's your Riot which knows what it's doing and is this great company that you love to reference as upholding the amazing game that is League of Legends, and then there's the other Riot that's this moron who shits all over everything you love.
There's only one Riot. If they make a decision to do something, it's in line with what their balance goals are. If it's contrary to something they said 6 months ago, that doesn't mean they're some schizophrenic teenager angsting around, it means that they changed their mind about what they said 6 months ago.
1. bonus armor for first 8 minutes is unintuitive, but -20 dmg from champion attacks is even more so. 2. riot explicitly said that they did it to lower the # of 2v1's. 3. if there are more elegant ways of lower # of 2v1's, why not do those instead of -20 dmg? 4. they're harder to kill if you're an auto attack based midlaner, that means running ADC in midlane is no longer as good. (i'm talking about solo adc's like ez/quinn/etc, not duo lane adc's) 5. It's been in play in EU and NA >.>
If they ARE playing on the patch, then points 2 and 5 completely contradict each other. Something that is having no effect can't be "crushing everything"
And the towers are not significantly harder to kill wei, I'm sorry. If you'd like to make that claim, show me math that supports it. You are wrong.
EDIT: Yeah, this weekends games were definitely on 4.1
I think the interesting thing to note on this infographic is that the first tower still went 50/50 to both sides. There was definitely still some lane swapping, so I'd be interested to see the % in which the team who initiated the 2v1 took their tower before their opponent.
Ultimately, I think the sample size is still a little too small to make a judgement one way or the other.
On January 28 2014 02:43 NeedsmoreCELLTECH wrote: Can someone explain to me why exactly the tower changes were bad? I am not supporting it, just curious as to why the changes are considered so bad. It seems that Riot wanted to make adc/support toplane/midgame less attractive, and it seems that the patch achieved just that. If it's "inelegant", what would be a better alternative?
MonteChristo explains his problems with the tower changes from about 25 min onwards in this vid
Btw I hope your OP went well and everythign is A-ok now.
EPT
