EPT[Patch 4.13] Sona Update General Discussion - Page 36
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
imBLIND
United States2626 Posts
| ||
|
swim224
Botswana368 Posts
On August 06 2014 03:21 739 wrote: Short question, because I was always wondering : Are you possible to flash over projectiles? I mean are you able to flash on top of jinx's ult when it's going straight forward into you? Not sure about jinx ult because it's pretty long, but you can flash over the vast majority of projectiles. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 04:16 nafta wrote: That isn't really true either.It still is situational which is better.If you can freeze the lane and the ad already got the needed gold to buy whatever they wanted the support getting the solo xp for 6 can be much stronger than ad getting 100 more gold. Walking away from lane and backing takes pretty much the same time as dying early game. I agree. Killing the support early in lane is as good as killing the AD. The AD can't 1v2 without his support and so will be zoned off creeps anyway, just like they had died. They aren't strong enough to solo jungle monsters yet and can't roam before their support will get back. In fact, because most AD's have sustain from creeps, its almost always better to poke at the support. This will lead to a lot more support kills in your games. Granted this isn't possible with all supports (tanks mainly) but its true enough that if you shape your play around understanding that then you can win a lot of lanes basically for free. My favorite method is this: Kill/make the support go B. Right before the support gets back to lane, even if the AD isn't far from creeps, all in the AD. You don't have to kill him, just force him out of lane. The important part is to wait until the support is almost back to do this. Then the enemy support has no reason to go back and will try to get XP. Then you can do the same thing to them. By timing your engages for when the enemy will be coming back to lane you can continually zone both the AD and support from creeps, especially in lower ELO/uncoordinated bot lanes. I think the longest I've done this was 4 cycles (AD -> Support -> AD -> Support) before they finally came to lane as a pair. They lost like 2 levels of XP and gold. Game was over. | ||
|
nafta
Bulgaria18893 Posts
| ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 04:56 nafta wrote: You definitely can solo golems at any point of the game though.As long as you outrange a jungle monster you can solo it without taking damage(including dragon). Not before your support gets back to lane(good luck juggling resets, you're better off trying to snipe lane XP) and not if you're purple side. | ||
|
ArchAngelSC
England706 Posts
On August 06 2014 05:06 Goumindong wrote: Not before your support gets back to lane(good luck juggling resets, you're better off trying to snipe lane XP) and not if you're purple side. Jungle camps are bugged. If you stand a specific distance from them they walk back and forth between you and their spawn and barely regen any hp while never hitting you. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35118 Posts
On August 06 2014 03:26 Goumindong wrote: LLN applies. The average of the sum of different distributions is the average of the distributions. You will not, over a sufficiently large number of games played, get more or less ragers than anyone else in your same bracket or who is raising/falling. There will be variance but unless you're the problem you will rise because of the LLN. The more variables involved in the test, the higher the sample size required. The most common example of tLoL#s is flipping a coin 100 times and getting around a 50:50 ratio. But that comes with the standards of it being a two sided coin with one heads, the other tails and it's always the same coin or coins exactly like it. Soloque is like rolling 9 multimillion sided dice, where each have different distributions of heads and tails markings on them that can change their sides after rolling while still being determined and constantly swapping in and out hundreds of dice. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 01:39 Frudgey wrote: Sorry if this is an exceedingly stupid question, but I was under the impression that for bottom lane, if you guys get into a scrap, you almost always want to focus the ADC first instead of the support. Is this right or am I (as per usual) dead wrong? I don't play bottom lane very much so I wouldn't know. Feedback would be appreciated! The short answer is that you focus who you can kill. And that depends on the support the enemy is playing with as well as the AD. For the most part, supports have less sustain and less mobility than AD's. So you should often be focusing the support with your poke. This forces them to burn potions which will eventually give you the leg up in lane. If you're hitting the AD who is getting lifesteal and Doran's HP from creeps you may quickly find that your poke doesn't stick. In an all-in you kill whomever you can get to best. Sometimes that is the AD because the support is super tanky. Sometimes that is the support because the support can peel for the AD. The only exception to this defending against an All-in. If you're defending against an all-in you almost always go for the AD. This is because tank supports will do less damage than their AD and will be out of position to peel and peel supports will have blown their peel on the all-in and have no way to protect the AD but will still require the AD's consistent damage to follow up and win the engagement. In pretty much all instances the consistent damage of the AD is the better choice to attack because the support will have already used their abilities after which they just auto attack until they come back up. The core example is a Leona versus an Alistar. If Leona E's Ali's AD ali W's the enemy AD away and then moves to Q leona as she backs out in order to get some more follow up damage while Leo's AD has to walk back to the fight. No follow up on leona's engage means you probably win that engage. Similarly if Alistar W-Q's the enemy AD. Leona should e-q the enemy AD to prevent them from following up on Ali's burst and let her AD fend for themselves to peel the now abilityless Alistar. If Leo tries to e-q counter burst Alistar then the enemy AD kills hers since the AD has all the consistent damage now, and has free reign. But take another lane. Say you're playing against Nami. Do you all in their AD or Nami? Answer: you all-in Nami. If you get a stun on nami you can kill her before the CC ends, thus negating the power of her CC. If you go all-in on their AD nami can use bubble to prevent your AD from following up and then use her W to peel/damage/heal and turn the trade in her favor. So poke the person with less sustain(this forces them out of lane faster) and all-in the person with the most future damage/cc/peel which will sometimes be the support and sometimes be the AD depending on lane and situation. On August 06 2014 02:07 Volband wrote: Killing someone is one perspective, getting killed is another. I already told you how easy it is to win all-inlanes passively with Janna. They engage on you, and it's gg, you have your shield, your knockup, and your w to trololololo away. Hell, sometimes I even shield my adc if I feel safe enough, to their demise. edit: and the adcs I tend to play nowadays seem to know this too. Whenever I'm caught they completely ignore their support and immidietly jump to their adc. What? Janna is one of the easier supports to bust down. You just kill her when she is stun locked before she gets abilities off. If you try to take down the AD then Janna just peels for them and fucks you over. If you have enough CC to kill the AD through Janna's peel you have enough CC to kill Janna before their AD can counter burst yours. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Zess
Adun Toridas!9144 Posts
On August 06 2014 05:27 Gahlo wrote: The more variables involved in the test, the higher the sample size required. The most common example of tLoL#s is flipping a coin 100 times and getting around a 50:50 ratio. But that comes with the standards of it being a two sided coin with one heads, the other tails and it's always the same coin or coins exactly like it. Soloque is like rolling 9 multimillion sided dice, where each have different distributions of heads and tails markings on them that can change their sides after rolling while still being determined and constantly swapping in and out hundreds of dice. You're not very good at statistics. You should come back when you are a Ph D candidate in a quantitative field such as economics or biostatistics. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 05:27 Gahlo wrote: The more variables involved in the test, the higher the sample size required. The most common example of tLoL#s is flipping a coin 100 times and getting around a 50:50 ratio. But that comes with the standards of it being a two sided coin with one heads, the other tails and it's always the same coin or coins exactly like it. Soloque is like rolling 9 multimillion sided dice, where each have different distributions of heads and tails markings on them that can change their sides after rolling while still being determined and constantly swapping in and out hundreds of dice. No. Its true that the less variance between the polled distributions (not variance of the polled distributions) the faster things converge, but soloqueue is not like rolling a 9 multimillion sided dice (and even if it was that wouldn't actually matter) In soloqueue the probability distribution that you get ragers/leavers on your team is Binomial n=4, p = ? the probability that you get ragers/leavers on the other team is Binomial n=5 p = ?. For any p, Binomial n=5 dominates n=4 (in that the probability of x or more success is necessarily higher for all x besides zero). The p has to be the same because when you queue for soloqueue you're pulling from the same distribution of people and while you're doing so without replacement the population is large enough that we can look at it like its a with replacement problem without really any loss of accuracy (and note that the with replacement problem still has Binomial n=5 dominating Binomial n=4 for any population) This isn't a 9 million sided die, its like rolling a d100 9 times for each instance and sometimes we record a success on a 9 or lower and sometimes we record a success on a 10 or lower (depending on the ratio of ragers to non ragers who ar online in your bracket at this moment. This makes the variance of the difference of ragers that are on the enemy team to ragers on your team pretty low By the law of large numbers we can know that the sum of your random rage difference will asymptotically be the weighted average of the rage difference distributions. Because Binomial 5 dominates Binomial 4 we know that this number will be negative in all cases (that is we expect in more ragers on the enemy team always) then for every person it is the case that as they play more games they will always have more ragers on the enemy team. Asymptotically we get there pretty fast, a hundred or so games will make the likelihood that you have more ragers on the enemy team only a few %. Two hundred games and its basically zero. The lower variance between the p's the faster we converge to the proper % but this doesn't have much of an effect on how fast we converge to "below zero with high certainty" The only time this doesn't hold true is if something that you're doing is causing people to rage and this something is consistent across your games such that in it actually increases the probability that people rage/afk in your games but not on the enemy team. So we have to look at what is more likely when someone legitimately gets more ragers on his team. Is it more likely that he is supremely unlucky, or is it more likely that he is an asshole that makes other people rage? Answer: its far more likely he is an asshole who makes other people rage. Note that there have been situations in the past which could create ELO hell, but describing that is another long post that I don't want to do and you probably wouldn't understand anyway. But as far as I can tell, Riot fixed that situation, and the other instance in which it can occur doesn't seem like enough of a problem to worry about. edit: The other thing that can be happening is observation bias. When people on their team rage and AFK they notice it. When people on the other team rage and AFK they don't notice it. This of course does make sense since everyone fucking complains about "always having the AFK's/ragers on their team". Everyone can't be above average so at least some of those people must be wrong that they get more AFK's ragers than the other side. But if you legitimately do get more AFK's/ragers you need to look at your behavior and see what is causing it. | ||
|
Volband
Hungary6034 Posts
On August 06 2014 05:40 Goumindong wrote: The short answer is that you focus who you can kill. And that depends on the support the enemy is playing with as well as the AD. For the most part, supports have less sustain and less mobility than AD's. So you should often be focusing the support with your poke. This forces them to burn potions which will eventually give you the leg up in lane. If you're hitting the AD who is getting lifesteal and Doran's HP from creeps you may quickly find that your poke doesn't stick. In an all-in you kill whomever you can get to best. Sometimes that is the AD because the support is super tanky. Sometimes that is the support because the support can peel for the AD. The only exception to this defending against an All-in. If you're defending against an all-in you almost always go for the AD. This is because tank supports will do less damage than their AD and will be out of position to peel and peel supports will have blown their peel on the all-in and have no way to protect the AD but will still require the AD's consistent damage to follow up and win the engagement. In pretty much all instances the consistent damage of the AD is the better choice to attack because the support will have already used their abilities after which they just auto attack until they come back up. The core example is a Leona versus an Alistar. If Leona E's Ali's AD ali W's the enemy AD away and then moves to Q leona as she backs out in order to get some more follow up damage while Leo's AD has to walk back to the fight. No follow up on leona's engage means you probably win that engage. Similarly if Alistar W-Q's the enemy AD. Leona should e-q the enemy AD to prevent them from following up on Ali's burst and let her AD fend for themselves to peel the now abilityless Alistar. If Leo tries to e-q counter burst Alistar then the enemy AD kills hers since the AD has all the consistent damage now, and has free reign. But take another lane. Say you're playing against Nami. Do you all in their AD or Nami? Answer: you all-in Nami. If you get a stun on nami you can kill her before the CC ends, thus negating the power of her CC. If you go all-in on their AD nami can use bubble to prevent your AD from following up and then use her W to peel/damage/heal and turn the trade in her favor. So poke the person with less sustain(this forces them out of lane faster) and all-in the person with the most future damage/cc/peel which will sometimes be the support and sometimes be the AD depending on lane and situation. What? Janna is one of the easier supports to bust down. You just kill her when she is stun locked before she gets abilities off. If you try to take down the AD then Janna just peels for them and fucks you over. If you have enough CC to kill the AD through Janna's peel you have enough CC to kill Janna before their AD can counter burst yours. It might be true if you could stunlock her before 6. Leona gets a stunlock at lvl6, nami has a knockup and a stun at lvl 6, thresh has a stun and an enormous slow at lvl 6, etc, all after 6 when she just ults. She can also shield herself before the lockdowns hit her, ie before zenith blade, dazzle, death sentence, aqua prison, etc lands. But I'm all in for spreading the words to focus Janna in lane. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 06:06 Volband wrote: It might be true if you could stunlock her before 6. Leona gets a stunlock at lvl6, nami has a knockup and a stun at lvl 6, thresh has a stun and an enormous slow at lvl 6, etc, all after 6 when she just ults. She can also shield herself before the lockdowns hit her, ie before zenith blade, dazzle, death sentence, aqua prison, etc lands. But I'm all in for spreading the words to focus Janna in lane. Well i mean its pretty simple. Is Janna less or more tanky than the AD. Usually less tanky due to her low base stats and the fact that AD's get Doran's blades but Janna only gets a ruby crystal for defense. If Janna is less tanky than the AD should you focus the person who can peel or the person who can't? A focus the person who can peel maybe you can kill them before they can peel. Otherwise you just get peeled trying to kill the other person and they turn around and murderface you. Edit: I think what you're describing is just that Janna is a hard lane to all-in regardless of whether or not you go for the AD or her. But yea, if you're going to go in on Janna you should probably be going for Janna and not for the AD. | ||
|
Volband
Hungary6034 Posts
On August 06 2014 06:11 Goumindong wrote: Well i mean its pretty simple. Is Janna less or more tanky than the AD. Usually less tanky due to her low base stats and the fact that AD's get Doran's blades but Janna only gets a ruby crystal for defense. If Janna is less tanky than the AD should you focus the person who can peel or the person who can't? A focus the person who can peel maybe you can kill them before they can peel. Otherwise you just get peeled trying to kill the other person and they turn around and murderface you. Isn't adcs run atk damage and/or attack speed? That should be much less tankier than an average support page, even with manaregen runes, so dorans blade is kinda equalized. If everyone is low hp at bot and I'm ab out to get cc-d and I know I'm dead, I just shield my ad, try to use exhaust q w in that order before I die, and he should cleanup. If only I'm at ~30% hp I'm done if bursted, of course. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
For example you can more safely try to grab a Janna than an Ezreal as Blitz. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On August 06 2014 06:14 Volband wrote: Isn't adcs run atk damage and/or attack speed? That should be much less tankier than an average support page, even with manaregen runes, so dorans blade is kinda equalized. If everyone is low hp at bot and I'm ab out to get cc-d and I know I'm dead, I just shield my ad, try to use exhaust q w in that order before I die, and he should cleanup. If only I'm at ~30% hp I'm done if bursted, of course. I run armor quints on my AD pages, sometimes a mix of armor quints and lifesteal. I run full tank (armor reds, scaling armor yellows, armor quints, scaling mr blues) on Janna so i might be a bit more tanky. But Janna has 356 + 76 HP/level with 13 +3.8 armor. Most AD's have 18-19 armor (so making up for free the armor reds) and 3 to 3.5 armor level. Someone like graves has upwards of 29 armor at level 1(10 stacks) and all of them have significantly more base and scaling health plus lifesteal/on hit life. And to top that all off, Janna is the champion you should be poking, since she will have less sustain than the AD (if she shields herself to prevent it then you come out ahead in mana and win that eventually) so she will tend to have less HP for the all in anyway. In most situations she absolutely should be less tanky than her AD. Part of playing her well is making sure that if you're engaged upon they have to go a long way through your AD in order to get to you(thus negating the tankiness and CC advantage). Maybe you're particularly good at doing that, i don't know. But i certainly know that if I am playing aggressive with Janna i damned well better not eat a CC or I am done for. | ||
|
Prog
United Kingdom1470 Posts
| ||
|
Volband
Hungary6034 Posts
Part of my success with her is that she's the champion I can just sit on my ass with, I know I don't have to make any plays whatsoever in lane. You watch out for your adc, shield him when you feel he could harass them (even easier if he himself starts the offence, I love ballsy adcs), and react to skirmishes, all-ins. On August 06 2014 07:03 Prog wrote: I think scaling runes on supports are terrible in general, because the lane is usually decided in the early game. Don't use them. You can always put in 2-3 scaling ones. I don't do that on any of my rune pages, but it's something you could get away with. | ||
|
nafta
Bulgaria18893 Posts
| ||
| ||
