EPT[Patch 4.5] Rune Rework General Discussion - Page 90
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
M2
Bulgaria4131 Posts
| ||
|
schmutttt
Australia3856 Posts
On April 16 2014 11:40 GhandiEAGLE wrote: To be frank I think this can be measured by my LSMP, or my Lee Sin Measurement Process. Everything about the skill level of the Lee Sin hinges on the skin he uses. Dragon Fist or Pool Party and the Lee most likely sucks. Muay Thai and Classic are decent, but have the potential to swing either way (although classic tends to trend towards better players). If they use Traditional Lee Sin, he's probably pretty decent. And then of course there's god-tier Acolyte Lee Sin. I've never NOT been carried by one. + Show Spoiler + The "Acolyte Effect" MAY be because, since the Acolyte skin looks so bad, it's only really owned by people who just want to buy all the Lee skins and are therefore Lee Sin mains and play a lot and are baller. I own dragon fist lee, can confirm. | ||
739
Bearded Elder29903 Posts
I own Traditional, Dragon Fist and Muay Thai skins. Traditional confirmed to carry the most. | ||
|
gtrsrs
United States9109 Posts
On April 16 2014 16:40 M2 wrote: anyone knows if Rito plans to add more bans in near future? I think 3 are not sufficient anymore with so many champs on the board. i have been told classically that riot will not expand the ban pool because they don't want to make it so you can ban out ALL viable champs at a position (i.e. 8 bans = 8 jungle bans = who do you play in the jungle?) | ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
| ||
|
739
Bearded Elder29903 Posts
Also Ryze/Jax has been extremely annoying to deal with, at least for me, so that makes already 3 bans. If I had to choose 3 of them I'd totally ban Yi/Shyv/Jax, can handle Ryze. | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On April 16 2014 16:52 gtrsrs wrote: i have been told classically that riot will not expand the ban pool because they don't want to make it so you can ban out ALL viable champs at a position (i.e. 8 bans = 8 jungle bans = who do you play in the jungle?) I think this is a kind of dumb argument. Say you ban out all the fotm junglers, then teams/players will simply have to brush off the non fotm junglers. With 118 champions in the game, there is no way you can ban out every possible champion that can do a specific role. I know TL doesn't particularly like Dota comparisons, but they have 10 bans and only 107 heroes with a perfectly healthy metagame in terms of picks. Changing how the pick/ban phase works can also alleviate the issue of target banning being too strong. If the problem is that changing pick/ban to a more Dota-style would add unnecessary complexity to solo queue, then simply only have increased ban for ranked 5s and tourney play. The biggest and most legitimate argument I can see for not wanting to change pick/bans to something like what Dota has is that it really elongates the pick/ban phase, which can be incredibly boring and spectator-unfriendly. | ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
| ||
|
Cheap0
United States540 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On April 16 2014 17:11 Ryuu314 wrote: I think this is a kind of dumb argument. Say you ban out all the fotm junglers, then teams/players will simply have to brush off the non fotm junglers. With 118 champions in the game, there is no way you can ban out every possible champion that can do a specific role. I know TL doesn't particularly like Dota comparisons, but they have 10 bans and only 107 heroes with a perfectly healthy metagame in terms of picks. Changing how the pick/ban phase works can also alleviate the issue of target banning being too strong. If the problem is that changing pick/ban to a more Dota-style would add unnecessary complexity to solo queue, then simply only have increased ban for ranked 5s and tourney play. The biggest and most legitimate argument I can see for not wanting to change pick/bans to something like what Dota has is that it really elongates the pick/ban phase, which can be incredibly boring and spectator-unfriendly. I like the Dota pick/ban phase in all honesty. For soloq it's extremely tedious, but I think it adds a fuckton to diversity at the pro level. You could do something like BAN 1/2/2/1 PICK 1/2/2/1 BAN 1/1 PICK 1/2/1. That only adds 1 extra PB phase, while adding 2 extra bans which you can target specifically at what is left. LoL desperately needs more bans to allow more niche champs to be played, especially at the pro level. Simply by adding the ability to ban out a counter late into the draft phase already adds a huge amount of depth. | ||
|
M2
Bulgaria4131 Posts
On April 16 2014 18:11 Amui wrote: I like the Dota pick/ban phase in all honesty. For soloq it's extremely tedious, but I think it adds a fuckton to diversity at the pro level. You could do something like BAN 1/2/2/1 PICK 1/2/2/1 BAN 1/1 PICK 1/2/1. That only adds 1 extra PB phase, while adding 2 extra bans which you can target specifically at what is left. LoL desperately needs more bans to allow more niche champs to be played, especially at the pro level. Simply by adding the ability to ban out a counter late into the draft phase already adds a huge amount of depth. Even 4 or 5 bans in a row will be much better than what we have now | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On April 16 2014 16:52 gtrsrs wrote: i have been told classically that riot will not expand the ban pool because they don't want to make it so you can ban out ALL viable champs at a position (i.e. 8 bans = 8 jungle bans = who do you play in the jungle?) This is one thing that LoL is different from Dota. LoL has very clear define of lanes and specific champions. In Dota, if you ban out all the junglers, people will simply play another support. In LoL, if you ban all junglers, you lost a whole role. Sure, it may push people to try out double support, but jungling is such an important role (from a lot of perspectives) that it may shake the meta quite hard. That being said, you will never ban out all junglers because all new jungling items. If it comes to worse, we'll see soraka, leona, lulu jungle. | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On April 16 2014 18:14 M2 wrote: Even 4 or 5 bans in a row will be much better than what we have now I'd agree. With 4 you could do a 1/2/2/2/1. I wouldn't worry too much about banning out a role in all honesty. That's a low level problem. At the high level more bans would add so much to the game. There are at least 20 viable tops/mid/jungle(assuming that you can ban out a large majority of the bad matchups), 14(+jayce) ADC's, and at least that many conventional supports(a ton more if you include stuff that can be played as a support). On April 16 2014 18:42 canikizu wrote: This is one thing that LoL is different from Dota. LoL has very clear define of lanes and specific champions. In Dota, if you ban out all the junglers, people will simply play another support. In LoL, if you ban all junglers, you lost a whole role. Sure, it may push people to try out double support, but jungling is such an important role (from a lot of perspectives) that it may shake the meta quite hard. That being said, you will never ban out all junglers because all new jungling items. If it comes to worse, we'll see soraka, leona, lulu jungle. You can't ban out a role, even with 10 bans. I have personally jungled at least 40 different champs(I've done soraka&leona before) at various points in time, on all the different jungles(s1-s4). You can force somebody onto an uncomfortable pick, and that's a good thing. But you won't be able to ban anything out. Maybe for newer accounts or smurfs you would run out of viable champions, but honestly at this point there are so many that you'd never collect them all if you haven't been playing for a long time or else spent a ton of money. Small price to pay for a meaningful draft phase in pro-play that doesn't revolve around either target-bans on signature champs, or OPs. | ||
|
Duvon
Sweden2360 Posts
Personally I think it'd be fine with more bans though. It'd be cool if each person could choose a champ to ban, not only team captain. | ||
|
HazMat
United States17077 Posts
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
However, for tourney play that's irrelevant. So many champions are unplayed simply because they're too niche or they have no opportunity to shine since they get outclassed by 1 or 2 other champs. Increasing bans allows more niche champs to be played by banning out counters or because the 1 or 2 better alternatives are banned out. The biggest downside to Dota's pick/ban phase is the amount of time it takes. Pick/banning in Dota takes like 5~10 minutes, which is honestly absurd and not spectator friendly. That's easily circumvented by not giving teams reserve time. Honestly I think Riot should just make ranked 5s (where the hero pool issue isn't as big a deal since only hardcore/vet players tend to play that mode if at all - plus I also think it's stupid that you don't have shared hero pools in ranked 5s anyways) and competitive matches have more bans, but keep solo queue and normal queues at 6 bans. | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On April 16 2014 19:09 Ryuu314 wrote: I completely understand why they would be hesitant in increasing bans for solo queue. People already complain about having to buy champions and for newer players 8 or 10 bans would just murder their ability to play. However, for tourney play that's irrelevant. So many champions are unplayed simply because they're too niche or they have no opportunity to shine since they get outclassed by 1 or 2 other champs. Increasing bans allows more niche champs to be played by banning out counters or because the 1 or 2 better alternatives are banned out. The biggest downside to Dota's pick/ban phase is the amount of time it takes. Pick/banning in Dota takes like 5~10 minutes, which is honestly absurd and not spectator friendly. That's easily circumvented by not giving teams reserve time. Honestly I think Riot should just make ranked 5s (where the hero pool issue isn't as big a deal since only hardcore/vet players tend to play that mode if at all - plus I also think it's stupid that you don't have shared hero pools in ranked 5s anyways) and competitive matches have more bans, but keep solo queue and normal queues at 6 bans. SoloQ can stay at 3/3 bans. It comes down to just banning OP's and annoying shit anyways most of the time. team/competitive at minimum needs to go to 3/3/1/1, if not 3/3/2/2 for bans. The ability to respond to an opponents draft, as well as protect a late niche pick is huge, and even with just 1/1 extra ban, you'd add at least a dozen extra picks to competitive play. | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On April 16 2014 19:07 Duvon wrote: You don't own all the champions though. And we've all seen the posts "should I buy X or Y?, X is banned all the time but so fun". Considering the Riot business model, I can definately see them not allowing more bans. Personally I think it'd be fine with more bans though. It'd be cool if each person could choose a champ to ban, not only team captain. people actually dont own all the champions? lol I mean i'm missing 11, but i have no real desire to buy or play any of the champions left(i didnt like them before) so its like, why even bother? I have more than enough to play whatever role im forced into playing Realistically, even with 10 bans, even if you banned all jungles, that would mean some of the less played wooders(nunu fiora mummy pig cow) or something could all still be played and would be perfectly fine at it. | ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
On April 16 2014 19:57 arb wrote: people actually dont own all the champions? lol I mean i'm missing 11, but i have no real desire to buy or play any of the champions left(i didnt like them before) so its like, why even bother? I have more than enough to play whatever role im forced into playing Realistically, even with 10 bans, even if you banned all jungles, that would mean some of the less played wooders(nunu fiora mummy pig cow) or something could all still be played and would be perfectly fine at it. I own all champions and I have spent $0 on this game #rekt #ggggggggggg | ||
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
On April 16 2014 20:05 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: I own all champions and I have spent $0 on this game #rekt #ggggggggggg Opportunity cost of playing League, how much money could you have made if you were doing paid work instead of all your time spent playing League? TYL that you could've made an additional $40,000. #rekt | ||
| ||
