EPTIf we're talking about the need to snowball your laners there's an even bigger case against Nocturne I'd say.
[Patch 5.20] League of Legends General Discussion - Page 20
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
If we're talking about the need to snowball your laners there's an even bigger case against Nocturne I'd say. | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:07 Slusher wrote: Gragas is better than all 5 of those if you are good enough not to save enemy lives with his ult ( which isn't that hard) Gragas is a terrible solo queue jungler. His popularity and his win rate reflects this, but even a simple introspection shows that he is way too nerfed and his R is too difficult to use in solo queue. Nocturne's R seems lackluster on paper, but any form of reliable engage is highly valued in solo queue. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:11 Sufficiency wrote: Gragas is a terrible solo queue jungler. His popularity and his win rate reflects this, but even a simple introspection shows that he is way too nerfed and his R is too difficult to use in solo queue. Nocturne's R seems lackluster on paper, but any form of reliable engage is highly valued in solo queue. Global vision deny is not to be trifled with either, particularly with so many TPs in most games. Although that is just as much a competitive reason. Generally, though, I think he's always been pretty good later on because the long ult CD becomes less an issue, not more. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:16 krndandaman wrote: the winrate on champion.gg is a bit misleading though. gragas has one of the lowest playerbase average games played so its no surprise a ton of unskilled gragas players are lowering the winrate. if you compare players with 125+ games on both it is virtually the same (54%). unless you're going to bring up a separate argument of easier champ vs harder champ which needs a consensus of whether it should be taken into account for ranking 'champs good for soloqueue'. Low average number of games played because everyone with some remotely good sense of the game can tell there are way better junglers out there. Also, keep in mind Gragas WAS popular and lots of people played him (esp. on patch 5.5-5.6). He at the state he is in right now is due to multitudes of nerfs on him due his strength in competitive. This has unintended consequences in solo queue. Then there is the issue of transferrable skills. It's not the case that every champion is in its own world - the skill of a player is transferred from champion to champion due to shared playstyle and patterns. You can ask Scip to play a totally unfamiliar jungler (to him) and still crush most of us here. Since we are talking about Gragas (instead of some truly niche jungler like Fiddle, Yi, Kindred), you can't really expect to use inexperience as an excuse. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
Gragas has it all. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:33 krndandaman wrote: Where does that assumption come from? The counterpoint exists in Lee Sin right there who has THE highest average games played per person. Unless you're going to continue that assumption and say Lee Sin is the best jungler in the game right now and that anyone with remotely good sense of the game can tell that Lee Sin is the best jungler and that is why he has the highest average games played per person (which is a dumb assumption as you can see). Popularity of previous patches don't affect his numbers right now. Unless your point was that people are still playing him because he was popular, which isn't a relevant point since we don't care about how many trash players are playing. We care more about well the actual good players are playing him. ? It's not an excuse, it's common sense. More people with less than a dozen games on a champion play the champion, winrate drops. It's not rocket science. No matter how easy the champion is or isn't. I think you are just arguing with me for the sake of disagreeing with me at this point. What about the junglers which has similar avg games played to Gragas? | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
nafta
Bulgaria18893 Posts
Elise by far best jungler overall though. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:34 Slusher wrote: just look at it objectively, Gragas still has everything you could want in a character. innate sustain, innate % damage reduction, % health damage(over nerfed but it's there), a ranged aoe slow, a knock up and a displacement, lvl2 gank and late game on the same hero. Gragas has it all. This is kind of like when Monte claimed that Cinderhulk would be strong so long as it had health multiplicative scaling - which is clearly false because as you lower the scaling it will eventually go into a state where it is balanced. Similarly, while it is true that Gragas has innate sustain, damage reduction, ranged slow, %health damage, etc. it's the amount of these properties that is important, not the simple fact that they exist on his kit. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 02:58 nafta wrote: The problem with lee is you have to be good for him to be useful. Same with gragas. That doesn't mean they are bad in le solo but most players are dogshit. Elise by far best jungler overall though. The problem is that if you try to adjust for these factors you still see champions like Elise, etc outperforming Gragas. I don't think Elise is bad. But to say Gragas is good is problematic. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
nafta
Bulgaria18893 Posts
On October 28 2015 03:01 Sufficiency wrote: The problem is that if you try to adjust for these factors you still see champions like Elise, etc outperforming Gragas. I don't think Elise is bad. But to say Gragas is good is problematic. I have not looked at any stats for my statements so I wouldn't know but that is just the truth. If your definition of good is "champion that is suitable for anyone to pickup and carry with" I would agree but if you are using the actual definition of "this champion is stronger than his peers when used properly" then you have no clue what you are talking about. | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
I just don't agree on this particular champion. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 03:06 krndandaman wrote: If you don't think Gragas is good, that's fine. That's your opinion and could be true. But you can't just quote his winrate and use it to justify it, then do a poor job of arguing when someone points out why that statistic is misleading and not at all indicative of why Gragas is good or bad. Then claim that that person is arguing with you for the sake of it instead of you know, admitting you didn't justify your opinion properly. Come on man. I didn't even bring up champion.gg; you did. I explicitly said to put win rate and popularity aside yet you went into it anyway. | ||
|
kongoline
6318 Posts
| ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On October 28 2015 03:19 krndandaman wrote: When talking about Gragas you said I also don't see any quote within the last 2 pages with you explicitly saying put win rate and popularity aside. What are you even saying? You brought up winrate and popularity and I commented on why his win rate and popularity are misleading statistics and not at all reflective of why he is or isn't terrible. Can you please go back and quote my ENTIRE PARAGRAPH instead of picking out a single sentence without context? Edit: You didn't even quote a sentence. You quoted HALF OF MY SENTENCE. | ||
| ||
