|
On January 28 2014 03:18 Ketara wrote:
When did they start playing on the patch?
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.
they're not harder to kill if you're a standard mage, that just shoves waves and let minions hit turrets. (probably faster tbh) but if you're auto attack based, and often plink away at turrets with auto attacks, like Ez, then yes. it is harder.
5, they've only been in play the last weekend, teams are still adapting to changes.
|
On January 28 2014 03:08 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 02:49 Gorsameth wrote: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. Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 02:57 Kyrie wrote: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.
the criticism about splitting riot into 2 distinct entities would be fair if it were applicable - identifying inconsistencies in balance is not saying that there's a jekyll and hyde in riot any more than accusing a person of being wrong about something is to diagnose them with schizophrenia. when i 'call riot bad' for tower changes, i am taking issue with a specific action of theirs, which i think is how disagreeing usually works? to be frank i'm at a bit of a loss as to how you managed this stretch of reasoning - it appears as if you'd rather i just call things all bad or all good
to defend a design perspective that shifts after six months with the statement that 'they can do whatever they want because it's their game' is true but misses the point, which you actually state at the end of your post - 'they changed their mind about what they said 6 months ago'. if statements were made at one point outlining a specific vision for the current and presumably future direction of the game, it's hardly surprising that there might be a negative reaction to a reversal of that vision. whether there is a stated goal that was reversed in the context of the tower changes is debatable, but your argument here grants that some departure from historical goals is happening so i won't get into it
you seem to have a pretty strong emotional attachment to this topic
|
On January 28 2014 03:27 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 03:18 Ketara wrote:
When did they start playing on the patch?
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. they're not harder to kill if you're a standard mage, that just shoves waves and let minions hit turrets. (probably faster tbh) but if you're auto attack based, and often plink away at turrets with auto attacks, like Ez, then yes. it is harder. 5, they've only been in play the last weekend, teams are still adapting to changes.
You are wrong, show me math.
At least, it is not significantly harder. It is slightly harder at less than 100 AD.
|
On January 28 2014 03:29 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 03:27 wei2coolman wrote:On January 28 2014 03:18 Ketara wrote:
When did they start playing on the patch?
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. they're not harder to kill if you're a standard mage, that just shoves waves and let minions hit turrets. (probably faster tbh) but if you're auto attack based, and often plink away at turrets with auto attacks, like Ez, then yes. it is harder. 5, they've only been in play the last weekend, teams are still adapting to changes. You are wrong, show me math. At least, it is not significantly harder. It is slightly harder at less than 100 AD.
It's 20% more difficult at 100 AD...at what point does it become significant? Lol. Seems like it is just subjective at that point.
|
On January 28 2014 03:33 turamn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 03:29 Ketara wrote:On January 28 2014 03:27 wei2coolman wrote:On January 28 2014 03:18 Ketara wrote:
When did they start playing on the patch?
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. they're not harder to kill if you're a standard mage, that just shoves waves and let minions hit turrets. (probably faster tbh) but if you're auto attack based, and often plink away at turrets with auto attacks, like Ez, then yes. it is harder. 5, they've only been in play the last weekend, teams are still adapting to changes. You are wrong, show me math. At least, it is not significantly harder. It is slightly harder at less than 100 AD. It's 20% more difficult at 100 AD...at what point does it become significant? Lol. Seems like it is just subjective at that point.
It is not 20% more difficult at 100 AD. Please do some math and actually factor in the armor value and get back to me.
|
does the damage reduction go away after 8 minutes like the bonus armor before?
|
Yasuo Gragas ult combo is so deadly. Long range engage with enough damage to kill any carry. The only counterplay is the reaction time of Yasuo. But he could just keep pressing r all the time while Gragas is approaching enemy.
|
On January 28 2014 03:39 lega wrote:
Yasuo Gragas ult combo is so deadly. Long range engage with enough damage to kill any carry. The only counterplay is the reaction time of Yasuo. But he could just keep pressing r all the time while Gragas is approaching enemy.
I wish more adcs had a sivir spell shield would make life so much easier.Or maybe if banshee had to be activated instead of being useless.
|
On January 28 2014 03:40 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 03:39 lega wrote:
Yasuo Gragas ult combo is so deadly. Long range engage with enough damage to kill any carry. The only counterplay is the reaction time of Yasuo. But he could just keep pressing r all the time while Gragas is approaching enemy. I wish more adcs had a sivir spell shield would make life so much easier.Or maybe if banshee had to be activated instead of being useless.
Banshee as an active is actually a brilliant idea.
|
The only thing I noticed is that instead of 2v1, we just get a 3v1 now with the jungler (usually Elise or something) going to help push down turret. Pretty lulzy.
|
On January 28 2014 03:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
The only thing I noticed is that instead of 2v1, we just get a 3v1 now with the jungler (usually Elise or something) going to help push down turret. Pretty lulzy.
Indeed. The change is not only really clunky but it doesn't even achieve what they wanted to achieve. Really should have gone about it another way
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 28 2014 03:08 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 02:49 Gorsameth wrote: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. Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 02:57 Kyrie wrote: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.
you are wrong on #5, this week was played on live patch.
The changed towers are harder to punch down. And you are trading for 1st tier and dragon bot lane, but if you play with something like jinx you can easily punch through the first tier top and 2nd tier. If you are running slower push ADCs you wont be able to get it done fast enough, or the enemy team took Jinx (strongest tower pusher atm), and you will be either be sacrificing 2 towers and a dragon on right side for 1, maybe 2 towers, depending on how the enemy midlane rotates. It is entirely up to the midlane to decide how much blue team gets from this scenario.
What riot did this patch with the towers did slow down the 2v1 and made it harder to justify unless you got a strong setup for it. I did not entirely like it, mostly because it makes my job harder, but it is a nicer balance. Atm the perfect balance could be achieved by adding a little more gold to Dragon (I was toying with the idea of bot tower being worth more than top for a while, but that would only make the top solos even less entertaining and stale) so it can a true objective for teams to consider even before they take the turret.
|
Regarding the Renekt debate, I picked Trundle, and yeah, the lane went heavily in my favor.
Either Renekt doesnt build AD and Q wrecks him, either Renekt does and BotrK destroy his ass. The first few levels are pretty easy since you have innate sustain as well as trading power.
And yeah I'm pretty bad with Nasus compared to GOD TEUT but I still kind of know how to play a lane. But when a Renekt agressively push lvl 1 and 2, there's not much your E can do, and if a Vi/Elise comes to dive you on a Renekt empowered W, I have trouble seeing how you survive.
I'll have to try Vlad though, sounds interesting.
|
On January 28 2014 03:05 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +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.
The aggro-swapping makes doing dragon take even longer, which makes doing it with 2 or 3 early pretty pointless unless you killed the solo or the jungler.
On January 28 2014 03:09 turamn wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I agree with rewards just making earlygame champs too emphasized again. My problem is that, to take an early dragon is much too much of a task unless you did a successful dive/already took the tower.
The punishment for 2v1ing top should be this: The duo bot can push in your Solo, go to drag with their jungler, take drag, and be back to pushing still at full hp, and only missing out on getting like 10-15 autos on the turret.
Also, I think smite steals (or steals of any kind) on major objectives is stupid, but that is just my distaste for RNG (even though there is some skill involved). Like, imagine if you could deny towers (ala Dota) or even deny your own inhibs (for a no-superminion spawn for example), except,you didn't have the things that make denying harder than CSing in DOTA.
|
On January 28 2014 03:34 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 03:33 turamn wrote:On January 28 2014 03:29 Ketara wrote:On January 28 2014 03:27 wei2coolman wrote:On January 28 2014 03:18 Ketara wrote:
When did they start playing on the patch?
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. they're not harder to kill if you're a standard mage, that just shoves waves and let minions hit turrets. (probably faster tbh) but if you're auto attack based, and often plink away at turrets with auto attacks, like Ez, then yes. it is harder. 5, they've only been in play the last weekend, teams are still adapting to changes. You are wrong, show me math. At least, it is not significantly harder. It is slightly harder at less than 100 AD. It's 20% more difficult at 100 AD...at what point does it become significant? Lol. Seems like it is just subjective at that point. It is not 20% more difficult at 100 AD. Please do some math and actually factor in the armor value and get back to me.
Whoops. Forgot to consider that. No need to get aggro pls sir
RE Clutz: I am not sure what the trade off SHOULD be. Infact, I don't know if anyone does. I think from the standpoint that towers were fall slower for the team that initiates most 2v1's, then there's often really no advantage to creating that situation for your team. Short term you might get some free farm on a carry and deny some to the enemy solos, but you're putting your own team in that same situation.
|
Actually it would pribably be a horrible idea. The item gains way too much strength from it and becomes a massive balance issue. It becomes the flat out better version of QSS.
|
Pootie too good!4331 Posts
On January 28 2014 03:18 zer0das wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 02:05 JonGalt wrote:
you pussies need to grudge match more. give your purses to your boyfriends and settle this. Still waiting... mwhahaha.
RAWR
and riot is just trying to make lol more like bw. all these new OP champs and map imbalances. come on guys. figure it out.
|
On January 28 2014 04:38 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Actually it would pribably be a horrible idea. The item gains way too much strength from it and becomes a massive balance issue. It becomes the flat out better version of QSS.
Could make bveil cd twice as long.
|
trundles a good idea against renek
the trick is to make renek either to push really hard or not push at all, you can easily soak some damage early and pot up if you need to. You don't want it to be like the 2v1 lanes where they push so its a huge wave and they are level 2. In this case, a level 3 jungler+renek can dive you if you're level 1 but once you get level 2, W, pop ghost and stay calm run around the tower and its fine.
Renek can't really bully early because your passive is superior and Q is decent for level 1 fights. He hits level 2 first but you can arrange it so that he lane will push but you'll get your level 2 and be close to full hp.
|
I feel like Trundle is good against a lot of hard-hitting lane bullies. Is it because Trundle's level one is absolutely godly?
And on that vein, if Trundle is good against a lot of lane bullies why don't we see him played more? Or am I mistaken and Trundle doesn't actually perform that well against a lot of champions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
