|
On March 31 2014 19:29 Doctorbeat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 19:06 xes wrote:One thing I saw a lot of was people defining Pantheon's role as an "AD Caster," which isn't technically a role in LoL. A Role describes What a character does in LoL, whereas "Caster" is answering How a character does what they do. For instance, Ezreal is an AD Caster, but he's still a Marksman because his role is to output high sustained damage to whatever targets he can hit while keeping himself alive. To shift the analogy back to Melee characters, Talon and Zed are examples of AD Caster Assassins, while Renekton and Garen are examples of AD Caster Bruisers, and I'd argue that Riven is an example of an AD Caster Melee Carry (not everyone agrees here). Smash please, I have cancer. Riot is a carcinogen. Ontopic why is classification like this even necessary? Honestly the champions don't benefit at all from being put in a specific corner. The entire fun is to see champions be used in new exciting ways that we haven't seen yet.
Well, it's important to have some grasp of what a character generally does in a game and what the people who play that character think it does, because if you change all that it makes people angry. That said Riot's words for roles are pretty vague, WTF does "Fighter" mean anyway (not to mention "Tank" which sounds specific but actually isn't)? It's like how they coined Multiplayer Online Battle Arena which is an even crappier genre name than usual because it describes nearly every single game that is multiplayer and online.
|
United States15536 Posts
On March 31 2014 22:21 Sufficiency wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 21:59 AsmodeusXI wrote:On March 31 2014 21:36 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:22 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:16 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:08 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:04 Sufficiency wrote:Ezreal is really hard to play against as Ashe  Ashe, in general, is in a really crappy place. "Crappy" is a gross exaggeration. She is relatively balanced, but it feels really bad to play her because she always get dove on and it is up to her team to keep her alive. If a character in a game feels bad to play, it's in a crappy place. Sure, but you were using the word "crappy" in the context of Ezreal vs Ashe - in terms of balance, not look and feel. Also Ashe wins more % of the games than Ezreal in general. Ashe has been around 50-51% in ranked for a very long time, while Ezreal is around 48-49%. While I won't claim this means Ashe is "strictly better", I think it is fair to say that after factoring in the current meta, Ashe has an edge. Also remember the ultimate goal of playing ranked is to win. Who cares if she feels crappy if you can win the game? I mean, the ultimate goal of playing is to have fun. Even if you're winning, if you're not having fun, what are you even doing? If the majority of players agree with you on this there wouldn't be an elo hell. Unfortunately most players believe winning is fun and losing is not. Especially for ranked games where your devision depends on it.
I guess my point is winning on a Champion that's not enjoyable to play isn't as fun as doing so on an enjoyable to play Champion. At least to some people.
I mean, I remember this being one of the big old TL long-ago cases against Yorick. Wins every lane, boring as fuck.
Edit: Point being, Champions should be fun to play.
|
On March 31 2014 22:02 Sponkz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 21:36 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:22 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:16 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:08 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:04 Sufficiency wrote:Ezreal is really hard to play against as Ashe Ashe, in general, is in a really crappy place. "Crappy" is a gross exaggeration. She is relatively balanced, but it feels really bad to play her because she always get dove on and it is up to her team to keep her alive. If a character in a game feels bad to play, it's in a crappy place. Sure, but you were using the word "crappy" in the context of Ezreal vs Ashe - in terms of balance, not look and feel. Also Ashe wins more % of the games than Ezreal in general. Ashe has been around 50-51% in ranked for a very long time, while Ezreal is around 48-49%. While I won't claim this means Ashe is "strictly better", I think it is fair to say that after factoring in the current meta, Ashe has an edge. Also remember the ultimate goal of playing ranked is to win. Who cares if she feels crappy if you can win the game? Omg non-fotm champions suck, what are you talking about? You need at least 10 KDA on Lee Sin or Nidalee to be good and win games wtf.
Tl hipsterism at its finest.
|
On March 31 2014 22:26 AsmodeusXI wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 22:21 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:59 AsmodeusXI wrote:On March 31 2014 21:36 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:22 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:16 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:08 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:04 Sufficiency wrote:Ezreal is really hard to play against as Ashe Ashe, in general, is in a really crappy place. "Crappy" is a gross exaggeration. She is relatively balanced, but it feels really bad to play her because she always get dove on and it is up to her team to keep her alive. If a character in a game feels bad to play, it's in a crappy place. Sure, but you were using the word "crappy" in the context of Ezreal vs Ashe - in terms of balance, not look and feel. Also Ashe wins more % of the games than Ezreal in general. Ashe has been around 50-51% in ranked for a very long time, while Ezreal is around 48-49%. While I won't claim this means Ashe is "strictly better", I think it is fair to say that after factoring in the current meta, Ashe has an edge. Also remember the ultimate goal of playing ranked is to win. Who cares if she feels crappy if you can win the game? I mean, the ultimate goal of playing is to have fun. Even if you're winning, if you're not having fun, what are you even doing? If the majority of players agree with you on this there wouldn't be an elo hell. Unfortunately most players believe winning is fun and losing is not. Especially for ranked games where your devision depends on it. I guess my point is winning on a Champion that's not enjoyable to play isn't as fun as doing so on an enjoyable to play Champion. At least to some people. I mean, I remember this being one of the big old TL long-ago cases against Yorick. Wins every lane, boring as fuck. Edit: Point being, Champions should be fun to play.
Fair point. But Ashe is pretty fun to play if you are a masochist XD.
|
On March 31 2014 22:41 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 22:02 Sponkz wrote:On March 31 2014 21:36 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:22 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:16 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:08 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:04 Sufficiency wrote:Ezreal is really hard to play against as Ashe Ashe, in general, is in a really crappy place. "Crappy" is a gross exaggeration. She is relatively balanced, but it feels really bad to play her because she always get dove on and it is up to her team to keep her alive. If a character in a game feels bad to play, it's in a crappy place. Sure, but you were using the word "crappy" in the context of Ezreal vs Ashe - in terms of balance, not look and feel. Also Ashe wins more % of the games than Ezreal in general. Ashe has been around 50-51% in ranked for a very long time, while Ezreal is around 48-49%. While I won't claim this means Ashe is "strictly better", I think it is fair to say that after factoring in the current meta, Ashe has an edge. Also remember the ultimate goal of playing ranked is to win. Who cares if she feels crappy if you can win the game? Omg non-fotm champions suck, what are you talking about? You need at least 10 KDA on Lee Sin or Nidalee to be good and win games wtf. Tl hipsterism at its finest.
you rang?
|
Uhhh, Ashe blows right now. The last time I saw Ashe played was in a level 16 game when I was playing with some friends. Since then I have not seen an Ashe since the season started. Other ADs are just stronger and offer so many more things. I think taking stats from solo queue and saying "Oh hey look a 50% win rate, balanced!" is super unreliable and makes no sense.
Also Ezreal probably is at 48-49% winrate because we all know NA Ezreals do no damage. ;;
|
On March 31 2014 22:46 Zergneedsfood wrote:
Uhhh, Ashe blows right now. The last time I saw Ashe played was in a level 16 game when I was playing with some friends. Since then I have not seen an Ashe since the season started. Other ADs are just stronger and offer so many more things. I think taking stats from solo queue and saying "Oh hey look a 50% win rate, balanced!" is super unreliable and makes no sense.
When the 50% is taken from every division from soloQ, it holds a lot of weight.
Also to say you have never seen her since level 16 is the most blatant lie I have ever heard. Looking at lolking, Ashe is played 25% of the time in normal and 8% in ranked on NA. Since there are 118 champions right now, 8% is average. In plat and diamond she is played less often, but still at 4% popularity.
|
Baa?21243 Posts
On March 31 2014 22:52 Sufficiency wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 22:46 Zergneedsfood wrote:
Uhhh, Ashe blows right now. The last time I saw Ashe played was in a level 16 game when I was playing with some friends. Since then I have not seen an Ashe since the season started. Other ADs are just stronger and offer so many more things. I think taking stats from solo queue and saying "Oh hey look a 50% win rate, balanced!" is super unreliable and makes no sense. When the 50% is taken from every division from soloQ, it holds a lot of weight. Also to say you have never seen her since level 16 is the most blatant lie I have ever heard. Looking at lolking, Ashe is played 25% of the time in normal and 8% in ranked on NA. Since there are 118 champions right now, 8% is average. In plat and diamond she is played less often, but still at 4% popularity.
You suck at reading comprehension.
|
On March 31 2014 21:36 Sufficiency wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 21:22 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:16 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 21:08 Gahlo wrote:On March 31 2014 21:04 Sufficiency wrote:Ezreal is really hard to play against as Ashe Ashe, in general, is in a really crappy place. "Crappy" is a gross exaggeration. She is relatively balanced, but it feels really bad to play her because she always get dove on and it is up to her team to keep her alive. If a character in a game feels bad to play, it's in a crappy place. Sure, but you were using the word "crappy" in the context of Ezreal vs Ashe - in terms of balance, not look and feel. Also Ashe wins more % of the games than Ezreal in general. Ashe has been around 50-51% in ranked for a very long time, while Ezreal is around 48-49%. While I won't claim this means Ashe is "strictly better", I think it is fair to say that after factoring in the current meta, Ashe has an edge. Also remember the ultimate goal of playing ranked is to win. Who cares if she feels crappy if you can win the game?
Let's be real, the lower you go in rank the more off meta ranked becomes. The more playing to the meta doesn't work because people don't know how to handle it properly.
In OGN winter, Ashe saw 0 picks and 0 bans. I doubt she was even hovered over in champ select. Ezreal was picked 36 times with a 60+% winrate. IEM, Ashe saw 0 play again. Ezreal went 0-1.
How can you say that Ashe is in a better spot than Ezreal when the last time she saw competitive play was, what, LCS Summer 2013 by C9? The main knock about Ezreal is that his damage was too low for a heavy bruiser meta. It's no surprise that Ashe, in addition to being immobile, doesn't do a lot of damage either.
On March 31 2014 22:22 phyvo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 19:29 Doctorbeat wrote:On March 31 2014 19:06 xes wrote:One thing I saw a lot of was people defining Pantheon's role as an "AD Caster," which isn't technically a role in LoL. A Role describes What a character does in LoL, whereas "Caster" is answering How a character does what they do. For instance, Ezreal is an AD Caster, but he's still a Marksman because his role is to output high sustained damage to whatever targets he can hit while keeping himself alive. To shift the analogy back to Melee characters, Talon and Zed are examples of AD Caster Assassins, while Renekton and Garen are examples of AD Caster Bruisers, and I'd argue that Riven is an example of an AD Caster Melee Carry (not everyone agrees here). Smash please, I have cancer. Riot is a carcinogen. Ontopic why is classification like this even necessary? Honestly the champions don't benefit at all from being put in a specific corner. The entire fun is to see champions be used in new exciting ways that we haven't seen yet. Well, it's important to have some grasp of what a character generally does in a game and what the people who play that character think it does, because if you change all that it makes people angry. That said Riot's words for roles are pretty vague, WTF does "Fighter" mean anyway (not to mention "Tank" which sounds specific but actually isn't)? It's like how they coined Multiplayer Online Battle Arena which is an even crappier genre name than usual because it describes nearly every single game that is multiplayer and online.
Fighter should signify for melee sustained damage. The problem with "Tank" is that Fighters are too effective while building tanky. That's why you see pseudo classifications like "Bruiser" warping what Fighter is. It causes weird ambiguous classifications like "light fighter" for champions like Riven that doesn't fit the "This is a fighter but we call it a bruiser" due to itemization restrictions yet is too slow on damage output to be an Assassin.
|
Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ.
|
On March 31 2014 23:05 Sufficiency wrote:
Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ.
Everything is viable in soloq.
|
On March 31 2014 23:05 Sufficiency wrote:
Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ.
I had a 100% win rate with S2 heimer for almost 25 games at high plat. I mained Viktor during this season and achieved almost a 70% win rate over almost 300 games.
Neither of these champions would have been considered viable at the highest levels of play (save for zz1tai playing Viktor a few times)
|
competitively strong champs (see diana and olaf) can be weak in soloq, but the reverse is uncommon in higher elo to the extent that i'm unable to come up with a single example off the top of my head. in fact, seeing a champion become suddenly popular in d1+ is a very good indicator of an imminent competitive breakthrough
snarky platitudes like 'Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ' have reasonable assumptions at their core but miss the point by a mile
|
On March 31 2014 23:12 Kyrie wrote:
competitively strong champs (see diana and olaf) can be weak in soloq, but the reverse is uncommon in higher elo to the extent that i'm unable to come up with a single example off the top of my head. in fact, seeing a champion become suddenly popular in d1+ is a very good indicator of an imminent competitive breakthrough
snarky platitudes like 'Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ' have reasonable assumptions at their core but miss the point by a mile
Katarina, Janna, Amumu.
|
Man I have not seen a Janna or amumu in a long long time
|
On March 31 2014 23:15 Sufficiency wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 23:12 Kyrie wrote:
competitively strong champs (see diana and olaf) can be weak in soloq, but the reverse is uncommon in higher elo to the extent that i'm unable to come up with a single example off the top of my head. in fact, seeing a champion become suddenly popular in d1+ is a very good indicator of an imminent competitive breakthrough
snarky platitudes like 'Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ' have reasonable assumptions at their core but miss the point by a mile Katarina, Janna, Amumu.
You tell Yango to fuck off because he says you lack the understanding of the game to interpret data about it, and then you make posts like these.
|
On March 31 2014 22:22 phyvo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 19:29 Doctorbeat wrote:On March 31 2014 19:06 xes wrote:One thing I saw a lot of was people defining Pantheon's role as an "AD Caster," which isn't technically a role in LoL. A Role describes What a character does in LoL, whereas "Caster" is answering How a character does what they do. For instance, Ezreal is an AD Caster, but he's still a Marksman because his role is to output high sustained damage to whatever targets he can hit while keeping himself alive. To shift the analogy back to Melee characters, Talon and Zed are examples of AD Caster Assassins, while Renekton and Garen are examples of AD Caster Bruisers, and I'd argue that Riven is an example of an AD Caster Melee Carry (not everyone agrees here). Smash please, I have cancer. Riot is a carcinogen. Ontopic why is classification like this even necessary? Honestly the champions don't benefit at all from being put in a specific corner. The entire fun is to see champions be used in new exciting ways that we haven't seen yet. Well, it's important to have some grasp of what a character generally does in a game and what the people who play that character think it does, because if you change all that it makes people angry. That said Riot's words for roles are pretty vague, WTF does "Fighter" mean anyway (not to mention "Tank" which sounds specific but actually isn't)? It's like how they coined Multiplayer Online Battle Arena which is an even crappier genre name than usual because it describes nearly every single game that is multiplayer and online.
I believe the issue is they care too much about what a hero does on paper rather than what they do in game. If you playing Renekton(Stupid I know) as a support in bot lane then here's completely different to playing him in top lane. Same thing as playing pantheon in the jungle to playing him in mid or top lane. Where you play and what you do changes the "role" of that hero. So you should be defining what they do rather than who they are.
I know this is going to get shit but let's take a look at dota. A hero like Naga has gone from being a carry to a last position support yet the hero itself doesn't have some strict definition of it's role. There is no need to say "Naga is a Melee Carry" because it's up to where you play it that defines what it is.
If Riot just took a step back and stopped trying to make everything fit neatly into their predefined structure they would have a better time at figuring out what to do with outliers. Games like League aren't neat, they are messy and should embrace this nature instead of trying to be something they aren't.
|
On March 31 2014 23:22 xes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 23:15 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 23:12 Kyrie wrote:
competitively strong champs (see diana and olaf) can be weak in soloq, but the reverse is uncommon in higher elo to the extent that i'm unable to come up with a single example off the top of my head. in fact, seeing a champion become suddenly popular in d1+ is a very good indicator of an imminent competitive breakthrough
snarky platitudes like 'Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ' have reasonable assumptions at their core but miss the point by a mile Katarina, Janna, Amumu. You tell Yango to fuck off because he says you lack the understanding of the game to interpret data about it, and then you make posts like these.
My major complaint about Yango is his lack of knowledge in modern statistical research, not his understanding of the game nor his criticism of my lack thereof.
|
On March 31 2014 23:19 Nos- wrote:
Man I have not seen a Janna or amumu in a long long time
Janna in S4 is not too great but good enough to be played on any level. She was an absolute monster in S3 soloQ yet still no one played her competitively.
In S3 her issue was mostly due her absolutely atrocious lane swap but it rarely happened in soloQ. After the S4 changes she is still decent, but she has a lot of problems vs Annie and she does not counter Leona as hard as she used to due to meta changes.
|
On March 31 2014 22:58 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 22:52 Sufficiency wrote:On March 31 2014 22:46 Zergneedsfood wrote:
Uhhh, Ashe blows right now. The last time I saw Ashe played was in a level 16 game when I was playing with some friends. Since then I have not seen an Ashe since the season started. Other ADs are just stronger and offer so many more things. I think taking stats from solo queue and saying "Oh hey look a 50% win rate, balanced!" is super unreliable and makes no sense. When the 50% is taken from every division from soloQ, it holds a lot of weight. Also to say you have never seen her since level 16 is the most blatant lie I have ever heard. Looking at lolking, Ashe is played 25% of the time in normal and 8% in ranked on NA. Since there are 118 champions right now, 8% is average. In plat and diamond she is played less often, but still at 4% popularity. You suck at reading comprehension.
nvm, i wont be mean
On March 31 2014 23:11 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2014 23:05 Sufficiency wrote:
Yes, viability in competitive matches is definitely a reflection of viability in soloQ. I had a 100% win rate with S2 heimer for almost 25 games at high plat. I mained Viktor during this season and achieved almost a 70% win rate over almost 300 games. Neither of these champions would have been considered viable at the highest levels of play (save for zz1tai playing Viktor a few times)
5-1 as Nunu Support in this season, the flaming is quite adorable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
