EPT[Patch 5.4] Wubwubwub General Discussion - Page 53
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
General_Winter
United States719 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On March 11 2015 22:00 Gahlo wrote: Hey Ketara, you've been robbed! http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/2ynsuw/bug_luxs_ultimate_does_not_caculate_her_passive/ Hilarious. | ||
|
AlterKot
Poland7525 Posts
On March 11 2015 19:12 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote: Problem with polls is almost same to ban/picks. Noone gives a single fuck about it, so if you got 10~ votes in poll, it's success already. Which is why you don't use the 5-scale system (good/excellent/whatever) because a) people have different tastes and b) if number of answers is low then it's harder to read the results. However, you can judge whether the game was important by number of votes itself - in my last LR thread 10 people voted for CST vs TiP, but 41 people voted for CLG vs TSM (and other games had 16 votes on average). Anyway take a look at these polls and tell me you don't have a solid read on which games people generally recommended and which they didn't :p BTW the system I personally use is 1) choose one League I'm interested in and watch all games 2) in every other league choose 2-6 teams I'm interested in and watch only their games 3) supplement that by watching games recommended by people on Twitter, here or in that MonteCristo show (Countdown of Monte Cristo). Been enjoying my S5 so far. | ||
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
| ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On March 12 2015 00:01 Zdrastochye wrote: With the addition of new champions every so often no, to prevent League from getting out of hand for new players coming in, how would people feel about ranked mode being a flat 100 champions that are voted in each week by the playerbase, and only champions in that pool of 100 are selectable in ranked game modes? This would lower the amount of champions needed (certain bad champions would never be needed) as well as provide a stable system where unbalanced and unfun champions could perhaps be voted out by the community. I'm not sure if it should be community driven or not, but I don't like the appeal of Riot being in control of which champions we can play in ranked, they already have total control in every other aspect. That sounds absolutely horrible. Either you have players vote for what champions are gonna be allowed which would be 1. impractical and 2. bye bye Urgot, Mordekaiser, Fiora and other champions with very few fans OR players would vote for which champions to permaban, which is retarded because we already have bans in champ select for that, there's no reason to ban like 10 champions more I don't see how that makes any sense whatsoever If your concern is new players, if the playable champions change every week, I don't think they will even spot the difference, except for being extremely confused about why they can't play this champion they saw a youtube highlight of just now. It wouldn't lower the amount of champions needed, you still need at least 16. Unless you mean Riot should remove the ban phase from ranked games, which would be pretty silly. | ||
|
Frolossus
United States4779 Posts
On March 12 2015 00:01 Zdrastochye wrote: With the addition of new champions every so often no, to prevent League from getting out of hand for new players coming in, how would people feel about ranked mode being a flat 100 champions that are voted in each week by the playerbase, and only champions in that pool of 100 are selectable in ranked game modes? This would lower the amount of champions needed (certain bad champions would never be needed) as well as provide a stable system where unbalanced and unfun champions could perhaps be voted out by the community. I'm not sure if it should be community driven or not, but I don't like the appeal of Riot being in control of which champions we can play in ranked, they already have total control in every other aspect. that sounds terrible and would likely only piss off a good portion of the playerbase | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
| ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
I am probably beating a dead horse at this point, I'm just utterly confused at how can anyone even come up with such an idea? | ||
|
AlterKot
Poland7525 Posts
| ||
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
I'm not saying it's what Riot should do, I'm merely proposing it as an interesting idea for others to either shoot down or notice an element of that they could possibly enjoy. Lets be honest, 0% of the stuff that we discuss on LL or anywhere really unless it's a bug will be implemented by Riot on our behest, so it can be fun to conjecture? | ||
|
Frolossus
United States4779 Posts
they slowed down the champion release rate drastically and most of the players either have already or are starting to complete their rune pages | ||
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
I think if League wants to remain in the forefront for the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years they have to start looking at lessening the burden on newer players. That's why I'd even bother suggesting a partially retarded system on how to do that. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Slayer92
29 Posts
On March 12 2015 00:01 Zdrastochye wrote: With the addition of new champions every so often no, to prevent League from getting out of hand for new players coming in, how would people feel about ranked mode being a flat 100 champions that are voted in each week by the playerbase, and only champions in that pool of 100 are selectable in ranked game modes? This would lower the amount of champions needed (certain bad champions would never be needed) as well as provide a stable system where unbalanced and unfun champions could perhaps be voted out by the community. I'm not sure if it should be community driven or not, but I don't like the appeal of Riot being in control of which champions we can play in ranked, they already have total control in every other aspect. New players coming in have like 30 levels they need to go through before they can start playing ranked. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On March 12 2015 01:00 Zdrastochye wrote: So you think the problem is current players not having IP to spend on stuff and therefore will lose interest/leave the game? In my opinion I'm more concerned with new players trying to get into some competitive game modes and having to grind their asses off to get to a starting point. You can definitely get into ranked once you're level 30 with some moderate amount of games under your belt, but mostly only if you know what you're doing and have an idea for how to spend your IP wisely. For newer players they might not have a game plan on how to do that. I think if League wants to remain in the forefront for the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years they have to start looking at lessening the burden on newer players. That's why I'd even bother suggesting a partially retarded system on how to do that. At this point, I feel riot puts the 1-30 level grind to dissuade smurfing. So painful waiting for 6 minute queues in normal games on my level 9 smurf. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
Since we don't always play with each other they overcome the smurf at some point and it sits around level 10 when I use the next one till they get around level 30. But I've got my main, a level 30 smurf that only played normals with beginners and coops since it hit 30 (it just got placed in Gold III after going 7-3, pretty much where my Elo was tat in s4 after playing ~15 games with it despite being placed in Gold V, but I'm not gonna tell the one who asked me to use it to duo since she's only in promos for Silver II and would feel discouraged), and a level 15-16 account that was around 10 when I started using it. If they're doing coops I use my main anyway for the IP. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On March 12 2015 01:00 Zdrastochye wrote: So you think the problem is current players not having IP to spend on stuff and therefore will lose interest/leave the game? In my opinion I'm more concerned with new players trying to get into some competitive game modes and having to grind their asses off to get to a starting point. You can definitely get into ranked once you're level 30 with some moderate amount of games under your belt, but mostly only if you know what you're doing and have an idea for how to spend your IP wisely. For newer players they might not have a game plan on how to do that. I think if League wants to remain in the forefront for the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years they have to start looking at lessening the burden on newer players. That's why I'd even bother suggesting a partially retarded system on how to do that. New players have it better than old players when it comes to IP. Their IP investment required to open champions reduced with every champion that comes out. I'm not getting a 1500IP rebate on ever 6300IP champion that got a price reduction when a new one came out. They're also getting massive cuts on the semi-annual 2-for-1 Rune Page sales, which I don't remember happening before Season 3(?). The 1-30 grind, combined with free week champions allow players to come in contact and experiment with a large variety of the game's cast. Any player that wants to go into ranked with the mindset of tryharding should be doing appropriate research anyway. If I wanted to play the competitive mode in CS:GO, I'd learn about the game mechanics I'm going to be dealing with. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On March 12 2015 03:07 Gahlo wrote: New players have it better than old players when it comes to IP. Their IP investment required to open champions reduced with every champion that comes out. I'm not getting a 1500IP rebate on ever 6300IP champion that got a price reduction when a new one came out. They're also getting massive cuts on the semi-annual 2-for-1 Rune Page sales, which I don't remember happening before Season 3(?). The 1-30 grind, combined with free week champions allow players to come in contact and experiment with a large variety of the game's cast. Any player that wants to go into ranked with the mindset of tryharding should be doing appropriate research anyway. If I wanted to play the competitive mode in CS:GO, I'd learn about the game mechanics I'm going to be dealing with. I mean.. it depends on how old you are talking, and how much you are adjusting the cost of champs upwards for the cost of T3 runes and rune pages that are needed to be competitive that older players don't need to spend for anymore that new players still have yet to buy. IP gains used to be much greater in the past, so a higher priced champ wasn't nearly as many games as it is now. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On March 12 2015 03:28 JimmiC wrote: How do people feel about ROA on Sion and What is the ideal 6 item build on the big fella? Pure tank. His AP scaling is pretty atrocious. | ||
| ||
