I thought this was big enough for a separate thread to the PBE/general.
Preseason 2016 crests the horizon! By Pwyff
Welcome to Preseason 2016. We’re trying to keep the conversation low-key for now with the Worlds final right around the corner but, with a pile of changes hitting the PBE soon, we wanted to get ahead with our gameplay goals for this preseason. After Worlds, you’ll hear more from other teams at Riot - with more than just gameplay! - but we’ll keep this focused on what changes will be hitting the PBE for this preseason and the upcoming 2016 season.
Let’s talk seasonal goals!
You may have already seen our early work with the ability power itemization changes in patch 5.13 to the juggernaut update in 5.16, but our goal for 2016 is to make each game of League of Legends feel unique. From the different champion strengths you bring, to the items you take to battle, all the way to the masteries you choose - we want your decisions to matter and have a clear impact on how each game plays out.
That said, this preseason we’re focusing on... Updating Marksmen
Through the years, marksmen have lacked meaningful differences, with their identities typically centered on the same thing: do lots of damage from range. In cases like these, if you’re being judged on only one competition (damage), you get a pretty obvious power ranking with no real roster depth.
Our goal is similar to our work with juggernauts, where we targeted a group of champions (in this case six marksmen - Corki, Miss Fortune, Graves, Caitlyn, Kog’Maw, and Quinn) who occupied similar strategic spaces, and gave them a little more ‘uniqueness.’ We’re doing this in two ways: how the marksman plays, and how the team plays with them. For the first, since marksmen are so concerned with their basic attacks we want to make sure each feels different. Should you have brought that shotgun to a javelin battle? Maybe! For the second approach, we want to really push the breadth of what a marksman offers. Much like how you pick Ashe for global stuns, or Sivir for when you gotta go fast, or Miss Fortune when you need some wombo for your combo, we want teams to think different based on who’s joining the fray.
Marksmen Itemization
Hand-in-hand with the updates for marksmen, we’re bringing some deep changes to marksmen items like we did with ability power purchases and juggernaut gear.
When we first tackled AP items, we wanted to accommodate the mages who blow up squishies while also offering equal opportunities for those who control the battlefield. When it comes to attack damage items, however, marksmen will always be focused on what lets them deal the most damage at any given point in time. Knowing this, we're offering more options when it comes to who (or what) you want to fight, and how you contribute to your team through that choice. So whether you want to be a lone gunman, dueling on the edge of the fight, or the nimble spellcaster, or the siege machine and tower crusher, we’re providing you with the right items to buy so you can take out the right targets.
Keystone Masteries
We’re updating the mastery system to offer focused, high-impact choices rather than a slew of nuanced micro-math optimizations. Each mastery tree will have three tiers. Each successive tier you invest in, you’ll be able to pick up some stats and a choice of one of three potential masteries (you can only choose one!). Tier 1 masteries will be nice to have (but not game-changing), tier 2s will have a decent amount of strength, but tier 3s - we’re calling them “Keystone masteries” - will be the ones that really augment your playstyle. We’re still experimenting in this space, but an example would be a keystone mastery that lets your damaging abilities also bleed enemy champions for a portion of your bonus AD and AP over time. Or one that grants a movement speed boost the moment you deal a large chunk of damage to an enemy champion.
By condensing power into clear decision points, the masteries you take from game to game should have an impact on your playstyle, and we want to offer multiple mastery paths for most champions in League.
Vision & Support Items
Two seasons ago we did a major revamp of the vision system by introducing sightstones, trinkets, and ward limits. This season, we’re adding more options for those about to ward up (also: we salute you). Our goal with vision is two-fold: first, we want to keep pushing the vision game as a team effort and, second, we want to make vision more dynamic than days past.
For that first goal, we’re doing things like free trinket upgrades for all, along with the option for tier 2 support items to upgrade into either powerful tier 3 active items or slot-efficient sightstone upgrades.
For the second goal, we’re removing Stealth Wards from the shop so teams will need to rely more heavily on their pink (and blue trinket!) wards to get the vision control they need. In tandem with this change, however, we’re also adding a new feature in ward ‘debris’ when a ward passes on. By giving you the ability to see the dead bodies of wards who’ve moved on with their lives, you’ll be able to learn more about your opponent’s vision habits as well as your own.
Starting Items
In-hand with our goal to offer a diverse preseason, we decided to take a gander at starting items. When there are standard starting item builds for every game of League, the end result is these builds tend to benefit (very slightly) certain champions over others. We’re taking a different approach this preseason by offering more clear opening ‘paths’ so that players can refine their playstyles with real choices, rather than just opting for a generally powerful start. You’ll see these changes reflected in two sets of items: starting power items, and sustain.
For items you’re bringing to lane, we’re using the Doran’s set (blade, ring, and shield) as a baseline “generalist” group that provide all the broad stats you want. From there, we expanded your options to provide a few more ‘specialized’ approaches, like Cull - a light skirmishing AD starting item that provides less defensive stats than Doran’s Blade, but gives bonus gold for killing a set number of minions.
As for sustain items: we first started with health and mana potions. Health pots are going up in price to better position them as a purchase for those who just need some sustain to get them past the early game. Any form of long-term sustain we folded into the refillable potions (and their subsequent upgrades) to really solidify their identity (because before, it was… flask and potions to be a ‘sustain’ build). Mana potions, on the other hand, are being removed. Our decision to remove mana pots goes along the same philosophy as starting items. 100 mana tends to benefit certain types of champions over others (with mana costs being balanced against individual champion kits) and can wildly shift from being a mediocre purchase to a very cost-efficient one. By removing mana pots, we can better balance champion ability costs with the mana regeneration stat while also streamlining the ‘sustain game’ of League.
It’s no secret that players who depart for the top lane can end up feeling isolated without a dragon to contest. Rather than just flipping the map on its head, we’re exploring ways to bring some relevancy to the north so top laners can feel like they're interacting with their team before the 15 minute mark.
Details are still being sussed out, but expect to meet something new on Summoner’s Rift in the early phases of the game. Defeat it, and gain single target buff focused on early game power and pushing down the lane. Wrapping Up...
We’ve got a few more changes on the way, but the above are some of our big gameplay plans for this preseason! That said, we’re not going to stop the conversation here. We’ll keep you updated on our progress while also sharing more of our long-term vision, so stay tuned after the World Finals for more on the preseason and 2016 season!
Pwyff added some context on Reddit for ward changes.
You'll see a few changes to support this rather than a raw "strip wards out." Pink wards, for example, are getting cheaper, trinkets automatically upgrade, and sweeper has some new functionality. We'll have more details next week!
[edit] Big one: Yellow trinket starts with 2 wards automatically.
Update: More information on Marksmen update
Hi all,
By now, you probably know we're giving small gameplay updates to Quinn, Kog'Maw, Miss Fortune, Corki, Graves, and Caitlyn. That said, we're also doing small changes to quite a few other marksmen that aim to establish/sharpen their identities. For these characters, please do leave your PBE feedback here. There's a lot of marksmen change going on here, and we're interested in your thoughts, so if you have an opinion, don't hesitate to voice it! Changes:
Ashe
Change Goals Allow Ashe to interact with chance-based crit events in a way that doesn't compromise her recently-new passive's steady damage output. Follow up the changes made to Ranger's Focus (Q) earlier this year to make the spell a more interesting, engaging part of her pattern. P - Frost Shot Base slow reduced 5/11/17/23/29/35% >>> 5/9/13/17/21/25% Dealing bonus damage via Frost Shot no longer counts as a Critical Strike (bonus damage unchanged) Ashe’s Critical Strikes (which once again happen only by chance per all other characters) deal only 1.0 Total AD (as opposed to 2.0 standard), but they apply Frost Shot’s slow at double effectiveness (10/18/26/34/42/50%), decaying to the base amount over the duration of the slow Q - Ranger's Focus Slow amplification removed Can no longer be cast at less than 5 stacks, and passive Focus no longer stacks while the active component is running Passive no longer stacks with Volley and Enchanted Crystal Arrow Cooldown removed
Draven
Change Goals Make axe-catching gameplay flow smoother, especially later in the game. Base Stats Attack frame improved by 30% Attack Speed per level reduced to 1.5 from 2.7 Basic attack missile speed reduced to 1600 from 1700
Ezreal
Change Goals Build upon Ezreal's affinity for CDR-centric spellcasting item builds. Q - Mystic Shot Cooldown reducing effect increased 1.0 >>> 1.5 seconds Cooldown increased 6.0/5.5/5.0/4.5/4.0 >>> 6.5/6.0/5.5/5.0/4.5 E - Arcane Shift Cooldown increased at later ranks 19/17/15/13/11 >>> 19.0/17.5/16.0/14.5/13.0
Jinx
Change Goals Playing up what it means to Get Excited! as a path to success through a teamfight. Slowing down Rockets' Attack Speed so there's some tradeoff she incurs more of a tradeoff with that weapon. P - Get Excited! Can now chain together and stack, increasing Total Attack Speed by 15% per stack (Movement Speed portion does not stack) Duration increased 4 >>> 6 Q - Switcheroo! Jinx now has -15% Total Attack Speed while using Fishbones, the Rocket Launcher
Kalista
Change Goals Increasing Kalista's affinity for Attack Speed. Experimental dash scaling changes that help attack flow and reduce overall power from jumping. Base Stats Base AS increased 0.658 -> 0.694 AS per level reduced 3.3% -> 2.8% P - Martial Poise Jump distance scales with boot tier (as live), jump speed now only scales with AS/Slows (is slower early game but scales up).
Lucian
Change Goals Open up non Attack Speed based item builds, and make The Culling's damage output feel more consistently meaningful throughout the game. R - The Culling No longer scales with Attack Speed Now fires 20/25/30 bullets based on rank
Sivir
Change Goals Increasing Sivir’s affinity for CDR, bringing us back closer to the late game dream of “Ricochet all the time”. Base Stats Base Attack Speed reduced 0.66 >>> 0.625 W - Ricochet Cooldown now begins on spell cast rather than when the attack buff expires Cooldown increased 9/8/7/6/5 seconds >>> 12/10.5/9/7.5/6 Attack buff duration reduced 6 >>> 4
Tristana
Change Goals Begin to shift Trist away from late game clean-up hyper carry to more of an all-in AD caster. Empower mid game all-in strength while stripping some power from late game sustained dps. Clean up of minor cooldown returning mechanics in favor of more impactful Rocket Jump resets. Q - Rapid Fire No longer reduces [E] CD on hit while active Attacking [E] Target no longer reduces [Q] CD on hit. CD 20s -> 20 / 19 / 18 / 17 / 16s W - Rocket Jump Dmg Rescaled 80 / 105 / 130 / 155 / 180 -> 60 / 110 / 160 / 210 / 260 No longer deals increased damage per [E] stack Now also resets on Max stack [E] Detonation on Champions E - Explosive Charge Now detonates instantly on 4th stack (max stacks). Bomb Animation shifted to represent this. Tristana’s abilities also add [E] stacks. Missile Speed 1800 -> 2400
Twitch
Change Goals Pushing Twitch a bit farther in the direction of the “marksman assassin” by adding an out to his assassination attempts via Ambush reset. Q - Ambush Added: Cooldown resets when an enemy champion affected by Deadly Venom dies Quality of Life Buff: Entering stealth now cancels Twitch's current auto attack order R - Rat-Ta-Tat-Tat Buff Duration reduced 7 >>> 5 Quality of Life Buff: casting Rat-Ta-Tat-Tat during Q's stealth no longer cancels stealth Cost 100/125/150 >>> 100 all ranks
Urgot
Change Goals Restore Urgot R's defensive steroid function later in the game so that he doesn't get wrecked so hard by all the percent penetration floating around out there. R - Hyper-Kinetic Position Reverser No longer adds 60/90/120 Armor/MR Now adds 30/40/50% Damage Reduction
Varus
Change Goals Make R zoning more obvious and powerful. Shift R damage from initial hit to Blight procs. R - Chain of Corruption Now displays max Spread Range to Varus and Enemies if it is spreading to at least one enemy champion. Rooted targets gain 3 stacks of [W] Blight over the duration of the root. Damage 150 / 250 / 350 -> 100 / 175 / 250
Vayne
Change Goals Silver Bolts is about expected time to kill on all targets (not squishy bursting), and Vayne's path to success needs to come through Silver Bolts. Base Stats AD/lvl reduced 2.66 >>> 1.66 W - Silver Bolts Flat Damage removed Percent Health Damage increased 4/5/6/7/8% >>> 6/7.5/9/10.5/12% Minimum damage introduced at 40/60/80/100/120 flat damage
This is probably a lot to process. Feel free to give feedback on as much or as little as you like. Focusing specifically on "Is this a good direction?" would be great. We're pretty open to change on the above stuff.
I'm quite excited to see how the game plays out with less vision, I'm not sure how well it's going to work for League but it could make things much more exciting since teams will be playing with less information. Although it kind of sounds like they don't want less vision they just want to make it free and gotten in gimmicky ways.
That being said I'm pretty sure there are stats that back up things like Korean teams warding more so
I'll give the pre season a try but if it's going in the same direction as Season 5 I'm not that excited for it.
They keep taking vision into a weirder and weirder place each season instead of just creating a simple elegant system. Wish they'd just add stuff like smoke of deceit but I guess their shop interface/philosophy will never allow that.
Excited to see what more they going to change. Having only really came back this season after s2 I felt this wasn't as fun as S2/S3 were.
I'm excited for that change though it means nothing without seeing what the trinket changes are going to be. I suspect Riot has had enough with professional (read, Korean) teams taking gold advantages and turning them into heaps of wards instead of actual items.
Pwyff added some context on Reddit for ward changes.
You'll see a few changes to support this rather than a raw "strip wards out." Pink wards, for example, are getting cheaper, trinkets automatically upgrade, and sweeper has some new functionality. We'll have more details next week!
I thought this ended with season 2?
On October 29 2015 03:05 GrandInquisitor wrote: I'm excited for that change though it means nothing without seeing what the trinket changes are going to be. I suspect Riot has had enough with professional (read, Korean) teams taking gold advantages and turning them into heaps of wards instead of actual items.
Even if they add different ways of getting wards on the map, trinkets have CDs, and being able to buy wards on demand to drop for TPs or scouting is pretty important. The idea is to reduce snowballing, and it sounds good on paper ("can't turn gold lead into vision lead to completely choke out opponent") but I don't think seeing S4 and S5 that it actually works.
I'm almost staring to wonder if utility laners will start buying sightstones with the changes - since sweepers still exist, stealth wards still exist too. And if you can't buy stealth wards to go with your sweeper like you can now - if you want to clear vision and have secret vision, you need sightstone + sweeper. And even cheaper pink wards?
I wonder if the ward limit per player will change.
Pwyff also edited post to say that yellow trinket now starts with 2 wards.
–]Pwyff [score hidden] 19 minutes ago Xypherous is running point on this change, but he's also gone through all champions who rely on mana pots to be functional and has buffed either their base mana regen or their base mana pool. In the future we can also keep a firmer grasp on mana gating and/or champions whose costs are just too damn high.
Also, context on what blue trinket does now.
[–]Pwyff [score hidden] 17 minutes ago TL;DR in this current iteration it drops a permanent 1hp visible vision ward (like a Pink but no stealth reveal) with a massive range. I believe the wards are off the cap, so technically if you drop them on cooldown in random places...
Yellow trinket starting with 2 wards is a massive disappointment to me, it seems they aren't really redoing vision so much as they are just making it free.
TLDR on what we did with her R to make it relevant at all stages of the game:
It now has an AD ratio (we actually already put that in an earlier patch) Each rank up of the ult now shoots more/faster waves Each ult wave can now crit (based on her crit chance) the entire wave will either crit or not
Caitlyn
The zone control marksmen (traps are on a charge system now) New play feel with headshot combos (trap and E trigger a guaranteed headshot on the target)
Miss Fortune
The wombo combo marksmen (ult scaling way better, can crit) New play feel with impure shots replaced with "love tap" new passive that gives bonus damage when swapping targets (this works well with Q)
Kog'Maw
The true glass cannon hyper carry (tons of dmg needs protection) W now doubles ALL attack speed and allows him to break the attack speed cap (but ad is lowered to 60%)
Corki
Magic damage marksmen -> passive now does big magic damage instead of true and all spells now do magic damage New mechanic: Special Delivery -> every ~5m in the game corki gets a special set of bombs in his base that allow him to cast a super mega W with much bigger range and impact
Quinn
The map mobility/roaming marksmen R reworked as a utility focused spell -> 0 cooldown and gives quinn crazy out of combat speed to quickly move around the map, not used for assassination anymore
Graves
We finally made his shotgun a shotgun -> up close burst damage marksmen Basic attacks fire multiple buckshots in a cone -> more damage up clost Q reworked to synergize better with the new basic attacks
I don't even know what to think of this other than ???
On October 29 2015 04:54 GrandInquisitor wrote: Seems pretty clear to me that they meant ADCs that occupy strategic spaces similar to other champions and weren't sufficiently unique, not "these ADCs are similar to each other".
yea I already feel like corki is played differently and for different reasons than any other adc
On October 29 2015 04:34 739 wrote: Dunno what they smoke at Riot HQ.
Must be pretty good stuff. If half those changes go through, it's not going to feel like the same game anymore imo. Too many reworks/updates too fast. The only ADC change that makes much sense to me is the Caitlyn one, because she's been pretty lackluster for a while. The others seem like change just for heck of it.
Hmm, video shows that currently, the Rift Herald gives 79 gold and an indicator similar to baron buff ONLY to the champ that killed it, not to other teammates.
Really interested in the shakeup to sustain. If health from consumables cost more per hp gained, it will make champs with built-in sustain even more oppressive than they are now.
Unless the damage ratios on Quinn are absurd they solve none of her issues. They didn't rework her into the assassin she should be, and instead went completely the wrong way, removing her duelling potential and the assassination potential. I don't understand how Quinn is relevant in any part of the game. Want a burst champion, Graves or Corki. Waveclear and utility, Sivir. Duelling: Vayne. Late game Hyper Carry: Kog/Jinx etc. etc.
They basically took away one of the best parts of her kit in her ult and replaced it with a "go faster to places" speed boost. C'mon. Instead of working her kit around her ultimate, they basically threw it away.
As far as the vision changes go, I'm not exactly sure where it will go. It's hard to conceptualise such radical changes. It's going to go one of two ways though, either improve the game or throw it into disrepair. Don't think there is going to be a middle ground here. Also RIP Eve.
If Riot can do similar things to AD itemisation as they did for tank (well armour tanks anyways, lol balanced AP) and AP itemisation, that would be a success. Obviously, it's much harder since ADCs are all very similar in the fact that they need to deal consistent DPS where as AP mids can provide a lot more variance.
As far as removing mana pots, again I'm just like Why?!?!
I feel like they're going to turn off a lot of casual players with these changes. All the changes are being pushed through way too fast for the casual player to follow, so I don't see this as an especially good thing.
On October 29 2015 05:24 Fildun wrote: I feel like they're going to turn off a lot of casual players with these changes. All the changes are being pushed through way too fast for the casual player to follow, so I don't see this as an especially good thing.
Preseason is the time to do crazy things if you're going to make changes. So its hard to get mad at "shake the game up changes" simply because they shake the game up. If it gets worked out to be fun and "balanced" then overall it gives the seasons more identity and probably helps player retention by changing how the game plays. So overall a good thing irrespective of the changes.
That being said, i am not sure riot understands their game enough for these changes to have the intended effect. There is still going to be "one mastery to rule them all" for every AD. And (more or less) one build to rule them all for every AD.
Yellow trinket starting with 2 wards is a massive disappointment to me, it seems they aren't really redoing vision so much as they are just making it free.
Didn't do that at all in season 4! It went oh so well, geez.
Also I have absolutely no faith in Xypherous to actually hit the bar with managing mana costs and stuff. Especially for junglers. Case in point: Nautilus has amongst the highest mp5 in the game and an above average mana pool too. He's still a mana hog (he was before his E got changed, it's even more the case currently). Vi is another jungler who's looking to buy mana pots over health pots because she doesn't lose HP past the first clear but using E burns through her pool ridiculously fast. Udyr, Nocturne have significant mana issues if they stay in the jungle too.
I don't see the point of the masteries that they showcased. you want a bleed? You want another frigin' "every 3 attack" effect? Why not just put it onto items or kits then? Giving this kind of power and visibility (ingame) to masteries is just going to make them even more confusing for new players, give us even more things to track during a game, and I don't buy into their diversity and choice bullshit. They're set up before the game so you can't even adapt them on the fly like an item build or skill order can. Fun fact: less than two months ago, red posts were stating Riot had no intention to rehaul masteries this time. Geez.
When I thought on my own about how to change Graves to give a "shotgun" and "short range" feel to him, increasing his aa damage at short range was the first idea that popped in mind. And the first dismissed too. Riot say they want mechanics to be ways for players to express skill or what have you. But if you force Graves in short range (not Jinx's minigun range, short range), you make it harder for yourself to kite people, to dodge skillshots, etc. so you're not feeling rewarded for coming close, unless it's really strong you're essentially punishing yourself. Add to it that it won't matter at all to melee champions because they won't be able to hit you without taking additional damage. Such decision-making, such counterplay. Meh. I was wondering how they'd do it because I expected them to avoid this too. I guess I overestimated them. :/
Caitlyn: seems like sensible changes, that are good, I still think they should expand on the earlier change to headshot (50% bonus armor ignore) and make jt 100%, BUT these changes all make some sense.
MF: Love Tap sounds weird, but the description is really vague so it could do anything at this point. I think a lot of people didn't like impure shots because it was magic damage scaling with AD, but I think most of those complaints centered on the ults reliance on unpure for damage up until this last patch (still pretty much need unpure to not do garbage damage). I could either way on this, as there isn't really enough info to go on. at the moment my biggest concern for MF is mana pots being removed from the store.
Kog: I know I'm a pessimist when it comes to reworks but this sounds like a nerf, the damage reduction is really high, and you need to stand still to take advantage of the compensation. this change also makes Trinity less good on Kog, which in turn could make his best builds have less health and want you to stand still for longer periods of time. Not going off a lot of data but I'm leaning towards nerf.
Corki: I actually sorta like the change to him doing even more magic damage, making team comps even more flexible than they already are with Corki. the W thing sounds dumb but completely ignorable. So Corki seems mostly fine, which fine because I think he's already a really good adc as far as having something he does well that other adcs don't do.
Quinn: I feel like adsmofro hit the nail on the head here.
Graves: I'm optimistic, because I don't feel like he really does anything at the moment other than have the 2nd best wave clear to sivir. Especially with the buffs to MF ult I feel like he's just 2nd fiddle in team fight aoe as well (probly 3rd when you consider late game twitch)
anyway those are my thoughts but I could be wrong, I often am.
Hurricane now gives MS + Crit and the bolts can crit. It's not damaging your normal damage scaling by taking it anymore.
Now cant flame randoms anymore for getting runaans on random adcs and doing no damage lategame
It lets you attack 3 people at once, why would you not want it to affect your 'normal' damage scaling? I feel like you shouldn't be able to itemise something like this without the drawback. This seems broken.
Hurricane now gives MS + Crit and the bolts can crit. It's not damaging your normal damage scaling by taking it anymore.
Now cant flame randoms anymore for getting runaans on random adcs and doing no damage lategame
I liked the Hurricane route (notably Kalista and Kindred) because it ignored crit in favour of alternative ways to deal high sustained damage.
They said (when explaining why they put crit on MF's ult) that crit is now core on every marksman with their new items, and Hurricane provides crit too... Yeah, I didn't have expectations about the marksman update, other than hoping we'd see more diversity, and the different build styles/needs of some champions supported, but from what we've seen so far it looks like I'll end up hating it.
They've said the same thing about every mastery rework ever. Masteries are always going to be a min max environment. Show me a wow style talent tree in any game that wasn't like this.
The lack of purchasable green wards will make ganking easier in the level 5-9 range but I doubt much will change afterwards. It's even easier to get the sightstone light now and teams needing more of them means less denial. The map will be just as hacked as it has been since they changed it.
Essence Reaver now scales up its cooldown reduction with other items.
This seems very unintuitive.
Anyway this is what new early game baron does.
Hey guys, Rift Herald is coming out and I wanted to fill in some of the details of what's going on here.
Location/timing: Spawns at the Baron Pit First appears at 4:00 Respawns every 5 minutes Despawns at 19:45 unless in combat; hard despawns at 19:55 no matter what
Encounter details: Melee-only attacker - but hits pretty hard. Need to be able to take a punch to tank RH. The Eye will occasionally open, exposing RH to bonus damage on attacks from behind equal to 12% of RH's Max HP as True Damage. Takes 35% less damage from ranged Autoattacks.
Reward details: 50 global gold to everyone on the killing team Drops "Doom's Eve" buff to the killer: 10% increase to all Damage (except True Damage) and 40 bonus MS Enhanced Baron Recall Enhances nearby minions offensive power, same as Baron buff, with an additional attack speed increase. Does NOT increase their defensive power (don't worry, you won't have to deal with last-hitting Baron buffed minions in lane)
We'll be dropping a Dev Blog explaining some more of the intent behind putting RH in the game, but any and all types of feedback are fair game here. Thanks everyone!
On October 29 2015 05:42 Slusher wrote: Kog: I know I'm a pessimist when it comes to reworks but this sounds like a nerf, the damage reduction is really high, and you need to stand still to take advantage of the compensation. this change also makes Trinity less good on Kog, which in turn could make his best builds have less health and want you to stand still for longer periods of time. Not going off a lot of data but I'm leaning towards nerf.
All in all its about a 20% buff to auto attack damage that isn't "on-hit"
So expect a change to BotRK and Wits End or a new on-hit item that will end up still having lots of DPS
Edit: I am OK with that, it seems kind of good to have an on-hit focused AD. And i never really liked trifoce on Kog anyway.
But overall it seems like they're throwing shit at the wall without even a clue of what might stick
Infinity Edge is slightly weaker now (little less AD), we shifted power elsewhere so it's less automatic and so that we could add cooler things to the Marksman space.
Essence Reaver scales its CDR off of your critical strike chance so that it works as a big core item (think IE space). It can now give upwards of +30% CDR.
Phantom Dancer does stuff other than just be straight up damage. Bonus movement speed while near your opponents and you take last damage from the last champion you hit. Isolate and kill people, basically.
Rapid Firecannon charges up like Shiv, but when charged instead of prepping you for the thunder, increases your attack range and gives you a fiery hit at the end.
Shiv does even more damage versus minions. It's specialized further into being the bursty clearing tool.
Hurricane now crits and the bolts crit. Also movement speed. It's in the PD / Shiv space now, so it should be an option for more Marksman.
Executioner's Calling is back, but it's a bit different and cheaper. Also it's a component item. It builds into something new.
Last Whisper is now a component item. It builds into new things.
There's something called Giant Slayer. It hurts health dudes.
Merc scimitar has Lifesteal, you should feel comfortable taking it over BT.
Death's Dance exist. It has something like Lifesteal but better. Also it "delays" damage.
And tons of changes all over the place. This is just some of the marks targeted ones.
On October 29 2015 05:57 Amarok wrote: They've said the same thing about every mastery rework ever. Masteries are always going to be a min max environment. Show me a wow style talent tree in any game that wasn't like this.
The lack of purchasable green wards will make ganking easier in the level 5-9 range but I doubt much will change afterwards. It's even easier to get the sightstone light now and teams needing more of them means less denial. The map will be just as hacked as it has been since they changed it.
As a jungler I bought several wards on top of my trinket whenever I felt like we needed them, early on. Playing top I also bought more than needed sometimes, just to ward the enemy jungle. As a mid laner I always bought them on top of the trinket till level 9 when I upgraded it to hold more wards asap.
These changes are going to be big for players like me, as rare as we are.
On October 29 2015 02:54 Faeny wrote: Whoa, can't buy stealth wards? So punishing players who knew how to make the most of the 75g tradeoff while rewarding the idiots who never buy wards?
Do yellow trinkets still grant stealth wards? Sightstones? Will vision be relegated mostly to supports again (and junglers in competitive)?
You say that but I haven't bought a green ward in like the last 200 games honestly I think green wards are a bit overrated atm.
On October 29 2015 02:54 Faeny wrote: Whoa, can't buy stealth wards? So punishing players who knew how to make the most of the 75g tradeoff while rewarding the idiots who never buy wards?
Do yellow trinkets still grant stealth wards? Sightstones? Will vision be relegated mostly to supports again (and junglers in competitive)?
You say that but I haven't bought a green ward in like the last 200 games honestly I think green wards are a bit overrated atm.
Hugely. Between sightstone and mini sightstone there isn't much more of the map to light up.
You are undervaluing the change for supports. Now buying gold item upgrade over ruby crystal for sighstone delays you more than before cuz you can't just buy a few wards.
On October 29 2015 07:32 Goumindong wrote: But does it if you can use your base 2 yellow?
Are they removing the level 9 restriction on upgrading the trinket?
Not that i know of, but they're making the base yellow trinket have 2 wards. So while you can't augment with greens, you might not need to with the increased vision you get for free.
Err didn't see that part. Guess it depends on how fast it recharges and shit. If say one support gets sighstone while other is still on trinket the red trinket+pink can make it pretty damn hard to have any vision at all. Probably gonna make lane a lot more snowbally. Also rip junglers even more op.
On October 29 2015 06:54 cLutZ wrote: They better not change Kog at all, unless they buff his W range based off levels so I can AA blue from Baron pit.
Yeah I really don't understand why they would rework him of all champions, there's tons of other champs that could use it more. He's played moderately in soloQ and sees a reasonable amount of play in pro play, no one complains about him being broken or oppressive, and I personally enjoy playing him. Maybe they don't like the concept of AP Kog?
On October 29 2015 07:23 nafta wrote: You are undervaluing the change for supports. Now buying gold item upgrade over ruby crystal for sighstone delays you more than before cuz you can't just buy a few wards.
Meddler quotes about sightstone upgrade paths:
Meddler (NA) Tier 2 support item + Sightstone = an upgraded Sightstone with upgraded stats from both component items.
E.g. Frost Fang + Sightstone combine into 'Eye of the Watchers' which has the Sightstone ward active, the Tribute passive and gives Health/AP/GP10/Mana Regen.
Meddler (NA) You'll have the choice of either merging your T2 support item with Sightstone or going for the T3 support version. If going for the T3 support approach Ruby Sightstone should now be more attractive too (gives reduced CD on active items, so pairs well with Talisman/Face/Frost Queen's).
By now, you probably know we're giving small gameplay updates to Quinn, Kog'Maw, Miss Fortune, Corki, Graves, and Caitlyn. That said, we're also doing small changes to quite a few other marksmen that aim to establish/sharpen their identities. For these characters, please do leave your PBE feedback here. There's a lot of marksmen change going on here, and we're interested in your thoughts, so if you have an opinion, don't hesitate to voice it! Changes:
Ashe
Change Goals Allow Ashe to interact with chance-based crit events in a way that doesn't compromise her recently-new passive's steady damage output. Follow up the changes made to Ranger's Focus (Q) earlier this year to make the spell a more interesting, engaging part of her pattern. P - Frost Shot Base slow reduced 5/11/17/23/29/35% >>> 5/9/13/17/21/25% Dealing bonus damage via Frost Shot no longer counts as a Critical Strike (bonus damage unchanged) Ashe’s Critical Strikes (which once again happen only by chance per all other characters) deal only 1.0 Total AD (as opposed to 2.0 standard), but they apply Frost Shot’s slow at double effectiveness (10/18/26/34/42/50%), decaying to the base amount over the duration of the slow Q - Ranger's Focus Slow amplification removed Can no longer be cast at less than 5 stacks, and passive Focus no longer stacks while the active component is running Passive no longer stacks with Volley and Enchanted Crystal Arrow Cooldown removed
Draven
Change Goals Make axe-catching gameplay flow smoother, especially later in the game. Base Stats Attack frame improved by 30% Attack Speed per level reduced to 1.5 from 2.7 Basic attack missile speed reduced to 1600 from 1700
Ezreal
Change Goals Build upon Ezreal's affinity for CDR-centric spellcasting item builds. Q - Mystic Shot Cooldown reducing effect increased 1.0 >>> 1.5 seconds Cooldown increased 6.0/5.5/5.0/4.5/4.0 >>> 6.5/6.0/5.5/5.0/4.5 E - Arcane Shift Cooldown increased at later ranks 19/17/15/13/11 >>> 19.0/17.5/16.0/14.5/13.0
Jinx
Change Goals Playing up what it means to Get Excited! as a path to success through a teamfight. Slowing down Rockets' Attack Speed so there's some tradeoff she incurs more of a tradeoff with that weapon. P - Get Excited! Can now chain together and stack, increasing Total Attack Speed by 15% per stack (Movement Speed portion does not stack) Duration increased 4 >>> 6 Q - Switcheroo! Jinx now has -15% Total Attack Speed while using Fishbones, the Rocket Launcher
Kalista
Change Goals Increasing Kalista's affinity for Attack Speed. Experimental dash scaling changes that help attack flow and reduce overall power from jumping. Base Stats Base AS increased 0.658 -> 0.694 AS per level reduced 3.3% -> 2.8% P - Martial Poise Jump distance scales with boot tier (as live), jump speed now only scales with AS/Slows (is slower early game but scales up).
Lucian
Change Goals Open up non Attack Speed based item builds, and make The Culling's damage output feel more consistently meaningful throughout the game. R - The Culling No longer scales with Attack Speed Now fires 20/25/30 bullets based on rank
Sivir
Change Goals Increasing Sivir’s affinity for CDR, bringing us back closer to the late game dream of “Ricochet all the time”. Base Stats Base Attack Speed reduced 0.66 >>> 0.625 W - Ricochet Cooldown now begins on spell cast rather than when the attack buff expires Cooldown increased 9/8/7/6/5 seconds >>> 12/10.5/9/7.5/6 Attack buff duration reduced 6 >>> 4
Tristana
Change Goals Begin to shift Trist away from late game clean-up hyper carry to more of an all-in AD caster. Empower mid game all-in strength while stripping some power from late game sustained dps. Clean up of minor cooldown returning mechanics in favor of more impactful Rocket Jump resets. Q - Rapid Fire No longer reduces [E] CD on hit while active Attacking [E] Target no longer reduces [Q] CD on hit. CD 20s -> 20 / 19 / 18 / 17 / 16s W - Rocket Jump Dmg Rescaled 80 / 105 / 130 / 155 / 180 -> 60 / 110 / 160 / 210 / 260 No longer deals increased damage per [E] stack Now also resets on Max stack [E] Detonation on Champions E - Explosive Charge Now detonates instantly on 4th stack (max stacks). Bomb Animation shifted to represent this. Tristana’s abilities also add [E] stacks. Missile Speed 1800 -> 2400
Twitch
Change Goals Pushing Twitch a bit farther in the direction of the “marksman assassin” by adding an out to his assassination attempts via Ambush reset. Q - Ambush Added: Cooldown resets when an enemy champion affected by Deadly Venom dies Quality of Life Buff: Entering stealth now cancels Twitch's current auto attack order R - Rat-Ta-Tat-Tat Buff Duration reduced 7 >>> 5 Quality of Life Buff: casting Rat-Ta-Tat-Tat during Q's stealth no longer cancels stealth Cost 100/125/150 >>> 100 all ranks
Urgot
Change Goals Restore Urgot R's defensive steroid function later in the game so that he doesn't get wrecked so hard by all the percent penetration floating around out there. R - Hyper-Kinetic Position Reverser No longer adds 60/90/120 Armor/MR Now adds 30/40/50% Damage Reduction
Varus
Change Goals Make R zoning more obvious and powerful. Shift R damage from initial hit to Blight procs. R - Chain of Corruption Now displays max Spread Range to Varus and Enemies if it is spreading to at least one enemy champion. Rooted targets gain 3 stacks of [W] Blight over the duration of the root. Damage 150 / 250 / 350 -> 100 / 175 / 250
Vayne
Change Goals Silver Bolts is about expected time to kill on all targets (not squishy bursting), and Vayne's path to success needs to come through Silver Bolts. Base Stats AD/lvl reduced 2.66 >>> 1.66 W - Silver Bolts Flat Damage removed Percent Health Damage increased 4/5/6/7/8% >>> 6/7.5/9/10.5/12% Minimum damage introduced at 40/60/80/100/120 flat damage
This is probably a lot to process. Feel free to give feedback on as much or as little as you like. Focusing specifically on "Is this a good direction?" would be great. We're pretty open to change on the above stuff.
ADC rework seems fine. I think they could have worded what they were talking about a bit better in the article, but there's a clear problem that needs to be solved and in hindsight I think they did good jobs with the mage/bruiser item overhauls, so I'm excited for that. Esp excited for Quinn because she is probably my second favorite champion to play after Lux.
Vision changes they do every season, I never understand them but you need the details and the ability to see it all in context to understand them, and in hindsight I've always thought each season had better vision mechanics than the previous season, so that's fine.
The new jungle mob seems like a good idea, seems targeted at getting rid of the 100% need for teleport in top lane. If top A teleports to secure dragon, top B with ignite can take the rift herald at the same time and get a power spike big enough to dominate the lane after the teleport guy comes back. I'm sure that's the general idea.
I wonder how Mr herald will impact junglers though, junglers who can solo him easily might be high value.
The change that I'm concerned with is the mastery change coupled with the starting item change.
I think in theory its a good idea. I love mastery micro math, but most people don't, and it does end up with some builds just being objectively better than others. Their approach is similar to WoWs and its good theory, although actually balancing it to a point where its player preference and not what is 0.02% objectively better is a high bar to cross, I imagine.
What worries me about it is that, in season 5 they didn't change masteries, because they said they'd identified that mastery changes have a huge impact on jungle champions and one of their big goals for season 5 was increasing the number of jungle playstyles and jungle diversity. They didn't achieve that goal, I think. Poachers was never used. Devourer junglers made it to solo queue but never competitive, slow ganking late game junglers were only around while cinderhulk was OP and disappeared after it got Nerfed, and so on.
They didn't really state any way how they are going to improve jungle diversity, while introducing bigger changes to masteries than they've ever done before, which might radically change jungle balance in a way that might take them half a season to catch up with.
The starting item changes I wouldn't care about so much, but I think coupled with the mastery changes it might end up radically changing level 1 on so many champions that balance might be a real mess for a while.
Also, while their statement that there's no item diversity at level 1 is true, and while in general I love item diversity and related choices, I want to make those choices based on what happens inside of the game, so I'm not sure how much I actually want diversity and choices at level 1.
So on masteries/starting items, I can understand their reasoning, but I'm worried that it will shake things up more than other preseason did and we might have a real mess for a while.
On October 29 2015 06:54 cLutZ wrote: They better not change Kog at all, unless they buff his W range based off levels so I can AA blue from Baron pit.
Yeah I really don't understand why they would rework him of all champions, there's tons of other champs that could use it more. He's played moderately in soloQ and sees a reasonable amount of play in pro play, no one complains about him being broken or oppressive, and I personally enjoy playing him. Maybe they don't like the concept of AP Kog?
Then, IMO, they should half his price, and clone him for current owners and make KogMaw and WamGok if they don't like him being a flex pick.
Quinn changes look kinda dumb. I don't see how a hyper-mobile ADC is particularly useful outside of a splitpush situation, which coincidentally is less powerful now on Quinn because her dueling potential is massively reduced. Remove the damage from the R and put that back into the blind on her Q imo.
On October 29 2015 10:25 Jek wrote: All I'm looking forward to is to see just how fast an uncapped Kog'Maw buffed by WW, J4 and Nunu can actually end up attacking.
+ezreal w + ardent censer + nidalee heal
damn
edit: ah only 5 champions tho so prob get rid of j4 since he gives the lowest AS
After 10 minutes of lazy reading, for some reason I wanna say that it's going to be worse than s5, lol.
Essence reaver has no right to belong into game, zz, why are you pushing it to be core, Riot. And of course, we needed even more crits, cheaper pinks (so noone will still buy them) and weird support changes, which will always go into one direction anyway.
And also, I can't wait to see how hard is Kalista going to get nerfed. And if not, I just wanna laugh.
On October 29 2015 09:59 zer0das wrote: So basically they're changing pretty much every ADC and hoping what comes out at the end is reasonable. Uh... good luck with that.
hey it's time that ADCs can you know, actually carry again
Also the vision is dumb. Vision needs to be almost infinite (ala S3) or almost none (DOTA). This splitting the baby on vision they keep trying to do is actually just thinly veiled RNG.
That change will effectively destroy Ashe. I don't see how an AD has any viable part in a team when their "crits" are just better slows than she used to give. 0 damage train ahoy.
It was a fun few months while it lasted Ashe, time to go back to not being picked for a couple years while Riot says you're still in a good spot.
On October 29 2015 12:38 Gahlo wrote: That change will effectively destroy Ashe. I don't see how an AD has any viable part in a team when their "crits" are just better slows than she used to give. 0 damage train ahoy.
there is a clarification post later, this is being added on top of the way her crit works on live
On October 29 2015 12:38 Gahlo wrote: That change will effectively destroy Ashe. I don't see how an AD has any viable part in a team when their "crits" are just better slows than she used to give. 0 damage train ahoy.
there is a clarification post later, this is being added on top of the way her crit works on live
ItachiKM - about 6 hours ago She still do bonus damage attacking a frozen target, but now it's shown as bonus damage and not as a crit (but if is unchaged at is says, scales with crit the same way as live).
She now can crit by herself but instead of 2x damage (that would be super op with the bonus damage), is 2x slow that decays over time when she crits, but bonus dmg still applied if frozed
Thats what I understood
Login to comment Permalink
3
RiotRepertoir - about 6 hours ago This is correct.
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
The Reload mechanic seems very tricky. 4s~ of not shooting (or E) to reload? That seems... really rough. Maybe his buckshot is that good? idk though
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
Red posts are by CertainlyT...odds are very high that he'll be bonkers.
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
The Reload mechanic seems very tricky. 4s~ of not shooting (or E) to reload? That seems... really rough. Maybe his buckshot is that good? idk though
It's 4 seconds to auto reload if you are sitting on 1 bullet. ~2 seconds if you use both. link
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
Biggest issue.
How the fuck do you last hit with a guy that takes 2 to 4 seconds between auto attacks?
I think this might be the first season ill actually take a break from the game and let the dust settle and all the OP items/champs get nerfed before I play again
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
Red posts are by CertainlyT...odds are very high that he'll be bonkers.
Bonkers still implies that he'll be perma banned (like Morde) or at best be the strongest early/mid ADC but have zero lategame (again, like Morde). It doesn't matter how bonkers you are, a late game 5v5 with a short range ADC isn't ever going to be viable.
Things are going to be so stupid for a while, but I like that they're going for really well defined designs with the adc role. Building team comps is going to be so much more interesting with both carry roles now having significant diversity.
On October 29 2015 13:25 droserin wrote: I have no clue what to think about what they are doing to Graves.
I can't see Graves ever being used in competitve with those changes. An ADC needing to be that close to enemies to unleash hell is a recipe for disaster. Graves will be heavily reliant on his team to set up favourable team fights since a Graves-comp will have zero siege power.
Red posts are by CertainlyT...odds are very high that he'll be bonkers.
Bonkers still implies that he'll be perma banned (like Morde) or at best be the strongest early/mid ADC but have zero lategame (again, like Morde). It doesn't matter how bonkers you are, a late game 5v5 with a short range ADC isn't ever going to be viable.
Of course it can be. Depends on the rest of the champion and/or meta. Urgot adc was a thing just a few months ago.
I absolutely hate they are pushing crit more. Build diversity? Fuck it, let's just give every item the stat the class wants most. Furthermore, they are adding/changing a bunch of items and also a fuck ton of champs? Looks super messy. Not to mention the flow on effect to AD champs like Zed, Panth, Riven, Fiora etc.
Also no mention of jungle? I mean it is preseason and the role has been garbage competitively for so long.
On October 29 2015 12:38 Gahlo wrote: That change will effectively destroy Ashe. I don't see how an AD has any viable part in a team when their "crits" are just better slows than she used to give. 0 damage train ahoy.
It was a fun few months while it lasted Ashe, time to go back to not being picked for a couple years while Riot says you're still in a good spot.
It's actually a buff because Randuin's and the anti-crit mastery won't interact with her damage anymore.
And Graves... giving him more short-range damage was already dumb because: - melee won't have a choice in biting it - he's shorter-ranged so it's already hard for him to deal his regular damage to champs like Cait, Lux, etc. so it'll be pretty much impossible to deal the buffed damage under normal circumstances
But they reduce his normal range and make his autos skillshots to begin with? This seems dumb. Have fun hitting Kalista I guess (already hard to hit her at short range with his Q and R). Incidentally it also destroys the Graves I liked to play (mostly around maximising Q and R), so yeah I can't be too happy about it. RIP the only marksman I wsa able to play to some success.
Also "hurr durr better when you're getting dived", who the fuck needs to dive you when you're so short-ranged you're the one doing the diving whenever you want to hit a tower?
You go and tell me how a 425 range champion who has pause ~2s after 2 autos to reload, and whose autos damage in a cone so that's it's really easy for him to unintentionally take tower aggro, is going to siege?
Or farm, for that matter. Unless his passive is strong enough that he can walk up to minions and auto twice to kill the whole wave, the incidental AoE is going to mess with it a lot harder than, say, Tristana's E. The need to reload (on a timer longer than the tower's rate of fire early on) also means he can't actually last hit the whole wave. Unless Q's damage, cooldown and mana cost allow him to spam it in conjunction with his autos, I don't really see him dealing with a Caitlyn shoving the wave for example, or Jinx with a support like Lulu. The wording on E isn't clear, so for now I'll assume he retains the dash, because if he doesn't he's going to get shit on, having no mobility other than his ult to deal with someone with non-targetet dashes (or with a longer range than his W).
Or, y'kow, you can act all high and mighty on masteries than smug on whoever is disgruntled with whatever Riot's doing. You're pretty used to that.
Thunderlord's Decree Your 3rd attack or spell on an enemy champion shocks the area around them, dealing 10 damage per level plus 20% of your Bonus Attack Damage and 10% of your Ability Power as Magic damage to enemies in the area (30 second cooldown)
On the plus side, Graves seems to be the adc counter to assassins, because he can delete the assassin faster than the assassin can do anything.
Also, anything can siege with Baron. It wasn't like Urgot comps couldn't end games in the Spring season. If Graves has enough burst to delete someone, then playing around Baron and 5 dragons is a possibility.
Riot are pushing the fiesta so hard. I got my clown shoes ready. I can't wait to play this shit though lol. Also lol at the guys "no ranked for me until shit settles in".
I'm not gonna say grave's reload is a bad mechanic, because thematically it makes sense.
Things I'm worried about though, are that if he's strong enough to survive diving, (I mean seriously, 425 puts you in range of just about everything), would he be oppressive in a 1v1 lane mid/top?
Aside from that, I feel like last hitting would be a bit of a learning curve. 2 second delay in between 2 autos, which also do splash damage is going to be a nightmare given that there are 3 of each type of minion in a wave.
I guess with the potential damage from each shot being (1+0.33*9)*0.75-1.1 tAD or up to 4xAD per shell, it is kinda understandable that it does scale ridiculously well. If my understanding of the mechanic is correct, if he builds AS he could fire off both shells incredibly quickly, such that you could W flash onto somebody, auto twice, E to reload a third, and then R out for some insane burst(6.0 to 12.0AD+Q+W+R damage).
Who knows, we might have an ADC assassin on our hands.
Pretty sure the goal isn't to find the highest possible damage but the most useful combination lol. Obviously it is gonna be insanely easy to just find the best damage setup.
That isn't true at all. What if there is a mastery in the bottom tier of say utility that makes your laning much safer/easier. Then you have to decide do you need it or is the damage trade worth it. I am not saying their system can acomplish this.
Well, Soraka has raid-wide DS with that utility mastery. Karma as well with mantra E, and maybe Ali.
Fervor of Battle [10] : Your basic attacks and spells grant you a stack of Fervor for 5 seconds (max 10 stacks). Each stack of Fervor adds 1-8 bonus physical damage to your basic attacks against champions, based on your level.
This is going to be really scary for the Yi mains out there....
On October 29 2015 20:41 Ketara wrote: I want more context to that list of masteries because it seems really awkward.
Based on that it only took me a couple minutes to figure out a highest possible damage Lux setup. Which is contrary to their stated goals.
The key is to not look at Riot's stated goals, because they aren't reliably accomplished.
I guess the theory is that it is also match up dependent and even on a safe champ like Lux you would surely want to spec slightly differently and the new mastery set up will accommodate that. In theory.
On October 29 2015 18:18 Ketara wrote: I don't think I can read this thread.
Bunch of kneejerk reactions up in here.
You act like this is any different from other pre-seasons. My suggestion is just to wait it out, and let all the brilliant minds of TL declare confidently that, for example, trinkets will ruin the game:
Trinket. Ward item with a specific 7th ward item slot for it. I don't need the specifics: the concept in itself shows that Riot goes in the wrong direction from the start.
Or how trinkets and the new support items were going to make people switch to DotA:
I havn't played DotA for probably 6 years now, I feel like I should just go play it, it seems to cater to the things I enjoy/want out of LoL anyway.
It's funny because people are up in arms about DotA 6.79 being too much like LoL, and while it's true that 6.79 made DotA more LoL-like, it's true in the best way possible. Icefrog clearly is paying attention to LoL and trying to take elements of the game that have made it so successful.
Meanwhile, despite some of these systemic issues in LoL being things DotA dealt with 3-4 years ago (vision issues, support itemization), Riot is intent on copying bad ideas from other shit MOBA games that nobody likes or cares about (vision item slot from Smite, last-hit "assist" gold from Strife) rather than trying to use how DotA dealt with the issue as a starting point.
I despise this change more so than any other. It was already a stretch that they gave gold on harass damage, but now they want to give shared gold? I hoped it would never make it through, but considering that they announced it, it's a definite thing. There's not many people complaining about it either, which really scares me. I don't understand why people are accepting this change so easily.
I feel like all the new stuff looks way stronger than the old stuff, which is cool but I wonder if some champions/items are going to get left in the dust.
I like the new mastery approach, although I'm sure it'll still be fairly cookie cutter anyway.
I actually like the Graves changes. Yes it's insane, but we have so many fucking characters in the game that having some more insanity can only be a good thing. They are right when they say that Graves currently just feels like a strict up- or downgrade to other AD's (making the choice to play him almost purely a numbers-based one).
Whether it'll be good or not is completely secondary. Numbers they can fiddle with, but he actually became interesting with this.
Biggest question mark on masteries, IMO, is why they think people want to fiddle with them match by match in the first place. They've always been a part of the game that's more tolerated than enjoyed, and redoing all of your pages at the beginning of each season is a pain in the butt that is invariably solved by "look at what my favorite pro uses & copy it exactly." Yeah, Riot perpetually whiffs on executing all their jungle diversity/whatever ideas. But here, even the stated goal mostly just means extra busy work before every match. Having a handful of "keystone" choices is a reasonable idea, but more so if you cut the number of mastery points from 30 to, like, 3.
I like that Riot is trying to differentiate champions. While strategy will always be dictated to some extent by which champions are strongest, having more variety creates opportunities for alternative strategies to shine because X champion has a niche in which they're better than the "strongest".
Other than that it's hard to gauge any of these changes, but in general they seem to be pointed in a positive direction.
On the other hand they compare Graves to Corki. Apart from their midgame spike then falling off, you can't really compare them, Corki deals mixed damage, has poke, both decent burst and sustained damage, and falls off lategame because he doesn't deal as much auto damage as other champions (wasn't so much the case when his passive scaled with crit and spellblade). Graves has pretty bad sustained damage because of his range and base AS, all his abilities are short-ranged so he can't really poke or siege either, he compensates it with a burst both stronger (esp. against squishy targets) and AoE, and he falls off really hard for all these reasons (plus no split damage).
Lucian is a lot closer to Graves, although he has an easier time hitting farther targets, better sustained damage and mobility (his E is straight-up better and also has a shorter cd), and better sieging/clear thanks to his ult (lower cd, more damage, and losing his ult is a lesser deal than for Graves). On the other hand he doesn't have as much burst and it's single-target mainly.
With the changes Graves is nothing like he used to be, so even if he becomes viable somehow, that's still going to be a champion ceasing to exist.
As for the trinket/support changes, they're still a design failure. Apart from Thresh, and maybe Blitz and Alistar, I see no support building more than a single branch, so it's still dictated by your champion over the team comps/state of the game. Coin's income punishes roaming, roaming which should be tied to the champ more than his item choice. Just look at how much people use their trinkets, or upgrade them. The whole "vision is a team thing" is a failure in soloQ, while it hasn't changed much competitively apart from reduced level 1 vision (which also leads to less invade, can be argued as a good thing as it avoids blow-out games starting 3-0). Finally, Riot's solution was "let's just throw gold at supports" instead of the more elegant "let's create pauper items focused on utility and gold efficiency over slot efficiency", which they clearly intend to keep doing.
At least there are more item options at the 1k-1.5k price point, which is good... if the build paths allow players not to lock themselves in a single item/path as soon as they buy their component. Stuff like reducing Tiamat's price and stats to provide the better waveclear is good.
A lot of champions have ceased to exist over the course of LoL. In some cases it's been pretty blatant (Xerath) and in others it's been a Ship of Theseus process (Gangplank). Either way it's happened, and Graves will just be the latest in a long line. That's sad for people who like Graves, but such is LoL.
The problem Riot is trying to solve is worth solving. I don't know that they'll succeed, but I'm all for increasing the uniqueness of champions.
I wish they'd push itemization utility and uniqueness as a method of diversifying uniqueness instead of just continually changing kits. Think there's a lot of merit in that.
On October 30 2015 00:23 Numy wrote: I wish they'd push itemization utility and uniqueness as a method of diversifying uniqueness instead of just continually changing kits. Think there's a lot of merit in that.
Champions are bland because they have similar or boring kits. Diverse itemization only works if champions work differently, and that means reworks.
Am I the only one always looking forward to the lovely chaos that is pre-season (and early start)? The huge shake up always lead to some dramatic and frantic games, generally the changes turn out for the better tho I'm still "meh" about the jungle item being mandatory idea.
I'm in particular looking forward to see how Graves and Koggles turn out, their proposed changes completely break how everything works up until now. I love it.
On October 29 2015 22:42 Kaethis wrote: I actually like the Graves changes. Yes it's insane, but we have so many fucking characters in the game that having some more insanity can only be a good thing. They are right when they say that Graves currently just feels like a strict up- or downgrade to other AD's (making the choice to play him almost purely a numbers-based one).
Whether it'll be good or not is completely secondary. Numbers they can fiddle with, but he actually became interesting with this.
I thought I was the only one pumped about it. The quad damage bonus if he crits with IE looks hilarious, it's like a... "I DARE you to dive my team". I will die so many times on the proposed Graves because of upcoming pandemic of Graves "flash and pray for a crit to instagib an enemy carry" disease. - better known as GFAPFACTIAECD.
I actually agree with Ethilis, Graves will be good by the time it hits live, mabye not the first ptr version of him, but heros designed by CertainlyT always turn out crazy.
On October 30 2015 01:35 Harem wrote: ok the apocalypse is here, rip league is kill, game is now donezo, time to become tree of savior progamer
annie can now perma tibbers with the 45% cdr mastery
Meh that's not so exciting, since Annie can basically already perma-Tibbers and no one cares since it's really Annie's passive that's scary, not her R. I'm more intrigued by the ability of Anivia to double-E someone after a Q. That seems crazy good.
On October 30 2015 00:07 Seuss wrote: The problem Riot is trying to solve is worth solving. I don't know that they'll succeed, but I'm all for increasing the uniqueness of champions.
The question is whether the desired level of champion uniqueness is compatible with both the ever-increasing roster size and their other design goals for the game. Riot has a lot of design goals that are individually reasonable but on a larger scale act against each other.
It becomes more and more difficult for champions to remain unique when you continue to add new ones to the game while also constraining your design space by restricting champions from extremely unconventional power curves or by deeming certain play patterns as unhealthy for the game.
On October 30 2015 00:07 Seuss wrote: The problem Riot is trying to solve is worth solving. I don't know that they'll succeed, but I'm all for increasing the uniqueness of champions.
The question is whether the desired level of champion uniqueness is compatible with both the ever-increasing roster size and their other design goals for the game. Riot has a lot of design goals that are individually reasonable but on a larger scale act against each other.
It becomes more and more difficult for champions to remain unique when you continue to add new ones to the game while also constraining your design space by restricting champions from extremely unconventional power curves or by deeming certain play patterns as unhealthy for the game.
their stance on auras / passives is a big example of this
As an adc main, seeing all these changes just for my role will be absolutely amazing. Machine gun kog maw, runaan jinx, wombo mf, bruiser graves, zoning/siegeing caitlyn, dueling vayne, zomg mid game spike corki. I am gonna really enjoy this preseason.
On October 30 2015 00:07 Seuss wrote: The problem Riot is trying to solve is worth solving. I don't know that they'll succeed, but I'm all for increasing the uniqueness of champions.
The question is whether the desired level of champion uniqueness is compatible with both the ever-increasing roster size and their other design goals for the game. Riot has a lot of design goals that are individually reasonable but on a larger scale act against each other.
It becomes more and more difficult for champions to remain unique when you continue to add new ones to the game while also constraining your design space by restricting champions from extremely unconventional power curves or by deeming certain play patterns as unhealthy for the game.
I'm optimistic because recent champions/reworks have moved a long way toward embracing concepts and ideas that previously would never have come out of Riot. They have not been universally successful, but I'm happy with the direction things are going.
It's also notable that we've seen only 4 champions this year. At that pace I'm not super worried about new champions muddying the waters, though it's still a risk.
Also we have gotten multiple champions that previously wouldn't have happened like tahm w/kalista+kindred ults which take control of someone else's characters. I still really hate how kalista ult centers your camera on her though meh.
On October 30 2015 00:07 Seuss wrote: The problem Riot is trying to solve is worth solving. I don't know that they'll succeed, but I'm all for increasing the uniqueness of champions.
The question is whether the desired level of champion uniqueness is compatible with both the ever-increasing roster size and their other design goals for the game. Riot has a lot of design goals that are individually reasonable but on a larger scale act against each other.
It becomes more and more difficult for champions to remain unique when you continue to add new ones to the game while also constraining your design space by restricting champions from extremely unconventional power curves or by deeming certain play patterns as unhealthy for the game.
Yup, particularly the power curve issue. The lack of diversity problem (in pro play, the only place that really is comparable) has always happened because either you had the Renekton problems where the early game was so important and snowbally that nothing else could reasonably be played, or the more modern problem that only the best is played because there is really no such thing as lategame champions anymore.
The only solution riot found was resorting to a massive patch pre worlds to throw everything into chaos, this inflating champion picks (due to teams still figuring out the meta).
On October 30 2015 02:09 nafta wrote: Also am surprised nobody has mentioned how the machete gives bonus xp now. Which is gonna change up the laners doing camps shit.
"We reduced every camps' worth in exp early on, it catches up after a few minutes, and machete gives bonus exp so you still hit your level thresholds from the camps. TL;DR: fuck double jungling"
Warlord's Bloodlust: Rank 1: Critical strikes heal for 15% of the damage dealt and grant you 20% attack speed for 4 seconds (2 second cooldown).
Twitch Rat-ta-tat-tat (R) [Need to confirm] For the duration, his basic attacks become piercing bolts that automatically crit the first target hit and deal 30% ( from 20%) less damage to subsequent targets, down to a minimum of 35% (from 40%) damage."
seems op as shit lol
but then again, alot of this stuff seems op as shit, so if eveything is op, nothing is op?
On October 30 2015 05:25 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote: "We didn't find a way to remove crit" "So we decided to implement way more crit"
~_~
The crit meter still wasn't OP enough to send NA teams out of groups, if they make crits more central to the game then they can make anything possible in competitive!
100% crit is fairly easy to get with IE, Rapid Fire, Shiv, and Essence Reaver. Rapid Fire + Shiv activate together to do around 470 magic attack on a 30 MR target. This also makes Warlord bloodlust to always activate, which gives a free 15% life steal and 20% attack speed at all times.
Quinn's ult at level 16 with alacrity without dragon 3 buff is 750 MS, which is hilariously fast.
Graves feels clunky as hell, has to be changed 100%
On October 30 2015 06:31 Ketara wrote: I kind of feel like taking away kogs mega range removes something that was core to his identity, but maybe that's just me.
I'd understand the new attackspeed cap on like twitch or something. Maybe itd be too OP on him because stealth.
Did they really remove kog's range? I didn't see it mentionned anywhere.
On October 30 2015 06:31 Ketara wrote: I kind of feel like taking away kogs mega range removes something that was core to his identity, but maybe that's just me.
I'd understand the new attackspeed cap on like twitch or something. Maybe itd be too OP on him because stealth.
Did they really remove kog's range? I didn't see it mentionned anywhere.
watching geranimo play him on pbe, apparently they gave back the mana cost to his w
I don't get why essence reaver is supposed to be for caster Ads and requires auto attacks to actually restore mana. and the item still has no mana return until completed, I just don't think Riot understands whats wrong with the item.
I mean going up to 30% cdr now will make it used a bit I'm sure, but for it to do what they say they want it to do, it needs to be more like manamune
This kind of change annoys me because it removes a strategic choice. Before we'd see teams, well mainly in Korea, rush homeguards early in order to get teleport engages. This seems to just remove that option and give it out at 20m arbitrarily.
I would rather it was rolled into other t3 boots, because I felt like they all made sense for certain heroes if you took out home guard, this fixes that problem but takes out upgrade timing as a choice.
I think they had a problem where they liked homeguard as a mechanic, but it was too much better than the other boots choices and it was too hard to balance.
For two seasons none of the other boots upgrades ever really got used more than on rare occasions to debatable effect.
People use distortion on Annie and occasionally alacrity on adcs and other than that its all homeguard for everyone all the time.
On October 30 2015 10:03 Ketara wrote: I think they had a problem where they liked homeguard as a mechanic, but it was too much better than the other boots choices and it was too hard to balance.
For two seasons none of the other boots upgrades ever really got used more than on rare occasions to debatable effect.
People use distortion on Annie and occasionally alacrity on adcs and other than that its all homeguard for everyone all the time.
Giving it to people to free just because everyone gets it isn't really an argument.
This is even against the Riot Kool Aid because rushing homeguard enchant on T2 boots vs staying on T1 boots and getting a T2/T3 item is Strategic Diversity and Meaningful Choices.
But removing the decision to buy homeguard and balancing more boots upgrades takes you from a decision between two choices (do I rush homeguard or get homeguard later) to a decision with a much larger number of choices.
So ultimately it is in line with their goals IF the remaining boots upgrades are balanced.
On October 30 2015 10:57 Ketara wrote: But removing the decision to buy homeguard and balancing more boots upgrades takes you from a decision between two choices (do I rush homeguard or get homeguard later) to a decision with a much larger number of choices.
That's a fair argument for removing Homeguard as a buyable option, but not one for auto-Homeguard at 20 minutes.
I'm kind of curious if it gives the Homeguard effect to people who don't even have Boots at all (even though that's not really a practical scenario in any real game).
The argument for auto homeguard at 20 minutes is that they really like homeguard and want to keep it in the game even though they can't balance it as an item.
They could have just made it an extra boot enchant and let you get it whenever on top of your other enchant, dunno why that isn't an option.
The decision to put it at 20 minutes may be intended to weaken teleport, now that I think about it.
Also, after looking at the actual mastery trees, I think I like them.
For Lux, it looks like there would be two builds, one with more magic pen, and one with 45% cdr. This might actually be a choice that can be differentiated based on playstyle and team comp.
Need to do some math though, the pen build might have better sustained damage than the CDR build, which would reduce how much of a choice it really is.
Well like always Hashassin doesn't know what he is talking about.
1) Triforce loses its AP and 5 AD and gains 10% CDR, which helps many many more bruisers than it hurts. It also gains 10% crit which is inconsequential. Hash doesn't seem to realize that it has 10% crit right now
2) AD was reduced across the board on ADC items so its not certain that things will be insane here
3) Last Whisper was nerfed, not buffed.
4) Better MR items means that its easier to get a single item to defend against the enemys MR threat and stack more armor/mr against the AD
5) There are lots of really good items for bruisers. Including offensive items. Like Deaths Dance (converts all that physical ability damage into HP)
On October 30 2015 10:57 Ketara wrote: But removing the decision to buy homeguard and balancing more boots upgrades takes you from a decision between two choices (do I rush homeguard or get homeguard later) to a decision with a much larger number of choices.
That's a fair argument for removing Homeguard as a buyable option, but not one for auto-Homeguard at 20 minutes.
I'm kind of curious if it gives the Homeguard effect to people who don't even have Boots at all (even though that's not really a practical scenario in any real game).
They cant get rid of homeguard because its a key anti-snowball mechanic for them.
Sure, but I like Ketara's idea of having it be a concurrent purchasable upgrade that doesn't interfere with other item slots, but still needs to be consciously obtained.
Having it automatically turn on at 20 minutes just seems rather arbitrary.
My best guess is that they set it at 20 minutes because they want to make teleport not so mandatory in top lane.
Post 20 mins homeguard has a lot of value for base defence and split pushing and things like that, but earlier in the game its biggest use is for teleport plays, which usually come from top lane and center around dragon.
So by removing early game homeguard they are indirectly nerfing teleport top lane without nerfing teleport for other roles. The new rift herald mob is doing the same thing.
That's my guess anyway. I think early hecarim homeguard plays look flashy and awesome and will be sad to see them go.
I'm actually super over the hard on for cooldown reduction too. It seems like there's been a massive creep in availability for every class and it doesn't seem right at all.
if they do this for the homeguards, then Flash needs similar attention too - either removed or given for free, this will make the choice of summoners so much wider
On October 30 2015 14:32 TheYango wrote: Sure, but I like Ketara's idea of having it be a concurrent purchasable upgrade that doesn't interfere with other item slots, but still needs to be consciously obtained.
Having it automatically turn on at 20 minutes just seems rather arbitrary.
While true, I don't think teleport should be the biggest motivator for this change. It should be the lack of diversity in tier 3 boot choices, with benefits to the teleport problem a secondary thing. There are many mechanisms by which you can influence the strength of teleport without needing to modify homeguard.
If you want to nerf teleport but not have an abitrary homeguard at 20 mins then just make teleport not work with homeguard. Problem solved, make me lead designer.
Both Triforce and BotRK are made worse, so it hurts some bruisers too (well Triforce loses AP, MS and AS for Crit% aand CDR, and costs more, no very bruiser-like). FH gets nerfed more and more, and Locket only gives a 10 MR aura now. Doesn't seem like it'd be really worth it...
I'd get Alacrity over Furor on champions with whom I want to reach the enemy or stay out of range (like Darius or Viktor) rather than chase them by autoing them constantly (Marskmen and Jax... ?), it's not that clear cut like you say.
On October 30 2015 20:20 Osmoses wrote: If you want to nerf teleport but not have an abitrary homeguard at 20 mins then just make teleport not work with homeguard. Problem solved, make me lead designer.
This was honestly what I thought they'd do. The arbitrary homeguard fits with the random direction they going with the game. Making it more arcadey. Rift herald is the same sort of thing. They want the game to be more along the lines of HotS in it's arcade like rpg nature. Makes sense when you look at how their champion design pushes "minigames" in the kit, now they deciding to put that design into the game as a whole. If they keep at this I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't get special jungle mobs that drop collectibles you use to do other stuff like time buff towers or something.
On October 30 2015 18:03 M2 wrote: if they do this for the homeguards, then Flash needs similar attention too - either removed or given for free, this will make the choice of summoners so much wider
This would add an extra button to press so I'm pretty sure it never happens, lol.
On October 30 2015 15:57 Harem wrote: also since i havent seen it posted here yet, the new jungle item replacing poachers (also purple smite is gone now) screencast.com
Purple smite allowed too many champs ini the jungle. We can't allow such pesky things like jungle diversity get in the way of our pre-defined, sanctioned and approved plans for which champion goes where!
On October 30 2015 21:07 Ketara wrote: That's dumb celial.
Purple smite was useless and also boring. See: any conversation Scip and I have been in about purple smite in the last six months.
I'm glad riot finally realized that there was no reason to have it in the game.
The item has positive soloqueue stats and is commonly used in professional play, so I'm not sure how it can be called useless, but I guess this isn't really the right place for this.
On October 30 2015 21:13 Numy wrote: Watching stonewall play jungle graves looks so bad + Show Spoiler +
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x1jhfRdpUA
. How can you lane with him at all now? Actually what does he even do now. How can you skirmish with 3 hits attacks then reload. I'm so confused.
Having messed around with him I actually think the design has a lot going for it. It's very different from what AD players are probably used to, but as far as kit designs go all the pieces work together to make something that might actually be OP.
His shotgun is a little confusing at first, but it's actually versatile and powerful. If you pump all four bullets into a single target you're doing 150%-220% damage, meaning after your initial three attacks you're already pretty far ahead damage-wise. Hitting multiple targets is fine too, since each target will take the full first bullet damage. IIRC you'll also reload while CC'd, so really reloading is only a problem if you're careless.
Q makes up for Grave's range by giving him an easy tool for killing caster minions. By rank 3 this will one shot all three of them if positioned properly, allowing you easy cleanup on the melee minions. It's equally devastating if you land the second wave of damage on an enemy champion, meaning Graves is exceptionally dangerous with a CC support or around terrain.
W is basically the same, which is to say it's still incredibly powerful if used correctly.
E is ridiculous. 10-30 Armor/MR doesn't seem like much, but the buff refreshes when attacking anything that isn't a minion. Moreover, the cooldown is reduced by 0.5s per bullet. With crit boosting the number of bullets to 8-10, you can stack True Grit surprisingly fast. Contesting objectives gets a lot harder when the enemy AD carry has 60-120 additional Armor/MR.
R is still R. Blow shit up.
Basically Graves is pretty cool and will actually probably get nerfed.
How do you play it now? Is it more like a very short ranged bruiser? I'm just trying to figure out how on earth you use him. Like how do you last hit and not get punished super hard when you go for the reload or in fights what do you do exactly. Did you try it still in dual lane or in a solo lane?
The concept of changing how attack work sounds cool but at the same time rather terrifying.
On October 30 2015 22:49 Numy wrote: How do you play it now? Is it more like a very short ranged bruiser? I'm just trying to figure out how on earth you use him. Like how do you last hit and not get punished super hard when you go for the reload or in fights what do you do exactly. Did you try it still in dual lane or in a solo lane?
The concept of changing how attack work sounds cool but at the same time rather terrifying.
His range is still 425, so it's short but it's not that short. Moreover you don't have to fire both shells to reload, if you fire one and then hang around (i.e. typical last hitting) you'll still reload the other. As such you'll have at least one shell almost all the time, and often two shells.
It plays out like Leona/Corki used to way back when. You get a support who can lock down a target and when they do you immediately hit Q and go in. Q->3*Autos is a crapton of damage, and you're tankier than your opponent. Positioning is critical since you can't shoot through targets, but as with Leona/Corki if you're the one starting the skirmish you basically win it by default.
Reloading seems scary/awful because it's easier to notice the reload than its benefits. Doing 2x damage when you are attacking while having a clear break to reposition/use abilities ends up being much stronger than it looks.
On October 30 2015 22:49 Numy wrote: How do you play it now? Is it more like a very short ranged bruiser? I'm just trying to figure out how on earth you use him. Like how do you last hit and not get punished super hard when you go for the reload or in fights what do you do exactly. Did you try it still in dual lane or in a solo lane?
The concept of changing how attack work sounds cool but at the same time rather terrifying.
His range is still 425, so it's short but it's not that short. Moreover you don't have to fire both shells to reload, if you fire one and then hang around (i.e. typical last hitting) you'll still reload the other. As such you'll have at least one shell almost all the time, and often two shells.
It plays out like Leona/Corki used to way back when. You get a support who can lock down a target and when they do you immediately hit Q and go in. Q->3*Autos is a crapton of damage, and you're tankier than your opponent. Positioning is critical since you can't shoot through targets, but as with Leona/Corki if you're the one starting the skirmish you basically win it by default.
Reloading seems scary/awful because it's easier to notice the reload than its benefits. Doing 2x damage when you are attacking while having a clear break to reposition/use abilities ends up being much stronger than it looks.
425 is something I would consider that short for an adc, but maybe he just gets overpowered stats.
His base AD is actually nerfed at level 18 (106 instead of 110) but he gets like 8 more at level 1, he also gains MR per level which is a big thing (True Grit never mattered against burst champions, especially frontloaded, as you'd have between 3 and 9 more in your resistances by the end of the combo), and his base MS is moved up to 345 (the highest possible is 355 for Yi/Pantheon, 345 is top 35% of champions and almost no ranged one has it).
I expect him to get shat on by Ashe, Caitlyn and maybe Varus though, because it's already hard to get in range of them, you'd also have to get in reduced range of them to hit several bullets and actually get ahead. Atm you can burn Quickdraw to get in range in range for Q and start autoing using the AS buff, but with the rework you're better off autoing first, then using the positioning/aa reset/shell to extend your trade/burst, than walk back while reloading (stonewall's video made me cringe, he'd wait to reload then press E, wasting a ton of dps). He knocks non-champions (or maybe non-pets too?) back when they get it by multiple bullets. To help kite the jungle I assume.
They say they want Q to be used as a way to deal with people running away from you, but it seems easy enough to sidestep, at least on the return trip, it doesn't extend far to the sides, and apparently it always goes max range, you can't send the shell on the ground closer to you to choose where the "T" goes? If you fire it into a wall, do you only get the explosion there, or does the line back to casting point still ignite? And the ignition goes back to casting point rather than Graves himself, right?
Q always goes max range, the return line on Q instantly ignites if you hit terrain, and the return line is based on casting point. Stonewall actually flubs this at the start of his video.
Caitlyn is probably a problem, but I'm much less concerned about Ashe/Varus. They don't have repositioning tools so if you close the gap they can't do much about it. However, as long as you have a support with a good CC you're fine, the threat of a full damage Q on a stun is pretty huge.
Is it possible for Graves to have more than 2 ammo markers? I seem to remember seeing something where he had 4 of them but I don't see anything in his kit that would mention it scaling up with level.
When I first read the changes 2 days ago I felt a bit sad for AD assassins since last whisper wouldn't do anything against the targets they want to assassinate.
Until this morning I realized there is a mastery giving 3(!) arpen per level. With arpen marks/quints and ghostblade you get 94 armor penetration. No adc has over 94 armor at level 18 with base stats and 9 armor from runes. Being able to deal true damage to any adc all game long (unless they get GA) with only one item feels really strong on paper.
It worked pretty well when they changed the black cleaver in pre season 3: no unique passive on cdr and flat arpen. The stack was just as great in game as it was on paper.
On October 31 2015 03:29 NpG)Explosive wrote: When I first read the changes 2 days ago I felt a bit sad for AD assassins since last whisper wouldn't do anything against the targets they want to assassinate.
Until this morning I realized there is a mastery giving 3(!) arpen per level. With arpen marks/quints and ghostblade you get 94 armor penetration. No adc has over 94 armor at level 18 with base stats and 9 armor from runes. Being able to deal true damage to any adc all game long (unless they get GA) with only one item feels really strong on paper.
The mastery actually gives flat 3 + 0.3 per level so it's not as broken. You're right about the LW change though, it's really noticeable. Also BT lifesteal is no longer unique.
On October 31 2015 03:29 NpG)Explosive wrote: When I first read the changes 2 days ago I felt a bit sad for AD assassins since last whisper wouldn't do anything against the targets they want to assassinate.
Until this morning I realized there is a mastery giving 3(!) arpen per level. With arpen marks/quints and ghostblade you get 94 armor penetration. No adc has over 94 armor at level 18 with base stats and 9 armor from runes. Being able to deal true damage to any adc all game long (unless they get GA) with only one item feels really strong on paper.
The mastery actually gives flat 3 + 0.3 per level so it's not as broken. You're right about the LW change though, it's really noticeable. Also BT lifesteal is no longer unique.
Ah thanks, I got confused by the wording. I spent most of the day wondering why nobody reacted sooner.
Qtpie was playing Graves on PBE this morning. He looks pretty broken- reminds me of release Graves where you'd just dive in and kill the other person because your damage was that much higher. And even if you don't, you're constantly knocking back melees who are trying to close the gap with your autos... or yourself with your ult (I think?). He was doing like 400 damage per auto at point blank to turrets mid-game. And then 800 to turrets at point blank at the end of the game.
He also gets extra bullets in his shells from IE when he crits, up to 10 bullets per shell. The lifesteal looks kind of ridiculous too.
On November 01 2015 01:58 zer0das wrote: Qtpie was playing Graves on PBE this morning. He looks pretty broken- reminds me of release Graves where you'd just dive in and kill the other person because your damage was that much higher. And even if you don't, you're constantly knocking back melees who are trying to close the gap with your autos... or yourself with your ult (I think?). He was doing like 400 damage per auto at point blank to turrets mid-game. And then 800 to turrets at point blank at the end of the game.
He also gets extra bullets in his shells from IE when he crits, up to 10 bullets per shell. The lifesteal looks kind of ridiculous too.
A large part of that is the one mastery... you get like 15% lifesteal or something on all crits. It is at the top of the Offensive tree.
"Warlord's Bloodlust (1 rank): Rank 1: Critical strikes heal for 15% of the damage dealt and grant you 20% attack speed for 4 seconds (2 second cooldown)."
http://talents.lol/ the new masteries: you can't put more than 18 points on a tree and each row is either 5 or 1 points max, cannot have like 7 points in line 1 in the same tree
looks like you have to go 18/12 or 18/6/6/ or 12/12/6, but the 18 points look pretty strong so probably people will prefer to have one
On November 01 2015 01:58 zer0das wrote: Qtpie was playing Graves on PBE this morning. He looks pretty broken- reminds me of release Graves where you'd just dive in and kill the other person because your damage was that much higher. And even if you don't, you're constantly knocking back melees who are trying to close the gap with your autos... or yourself with your ult (I think?). He was doing like 400 damage per auto at point blank to turrets mid-game. And then 800 to turrets at point blank at the end of the game.
He also gets extra bullets in his shells from IE when he crits, up to 10 bullets per shell. The lifesteal looks kind of ridiculous too.
Graves' autos will knock back non-champions. His ult knocks himself back.
But yeah, if he can get on top of you his damage is really high, especially if there's nearby terrain to instantly proc the second half of his Q damage. Q at rank 1 does as much damage as most abilities do at rank 3, and at rank 5 it's close to twice as much damage as any comparable ability.
Graves is potentially countered in lane by longer-range champions like Caitlyn, but I think he'll be fine even then so long as he has a support that can threaten an all-in.
ADC was the only role until now where the skill of playing the role is 80-90% and knowing your champ the rest. Excluding some specific adcs like vayne, draven, kalista, everything else if you are decent on adc role, you can pick any and play almost as best as adcs you played a lot. Now this will change I think. ADC will become like the other roles where it is up to 50% how much you know the role and another 50% how you play the particular champ. The difference between Riven and Mundo top or Le blanc and ziggs mid was never the same as graves - corki for example. Now it will become. One point of view is that this is all right why should adc be different than the other roles, let them be unique or lets say more unique. However, on the other hand the similarity in adc role, made all other lanes inequalities balanced. Not sure how to explain that, but when you have Nautilis top and the other team has Riven, riven tries to kill the adc and nautilis to protect his and depending on how successful they do the adcs either win or lose the team fights, each role/champ can relate to the adcs one way or another and all team fights were balanced around that. More or less. Now with the unique adcs we will actually have specific compositions where I am not even sure that all compositions will be optimal with what we considered an adc until now. Some compositions will be way superior over others and there will be no regular adc to even this up. I don;t know, maybe I am not right, but I think this is a possible outcome
She essentially lost her R combat increase and her silence. She just doesn't feel or look good. Essentially she is a weak TF with no burst or cc. She has a real hard time shoving lane to roam, and despite how fast she is she still has to walk through wards unlike TF.
She needs some tweaking. I'd honestly rather pay AD TF than Quinn. Better roaming, better range, cc, better team fighting...
On November 03 2015 00:27 iCanada wrote: She has a real hard time shoving lane to roam, and despite how fast she is she still has to walk through wards unlike TF.
I'm assuming you mean because TF can ult somewhere but the enemy team gets a global notification when that happens so I'm not sure that's a fair criticism. She also has the chance to show up quickly unannounced unlike TF
On November 03 2015 00:27 iCanada wrote: She has a real hard time shoving lane to roam, and despite how fast she is she still has to walk through wards unlike TF.
I'm assuming you mean because TF can ult somewhere but the enemy team gets a global notification when that happens so I'm not sure that's a fair criticism. She also has the chance to show up quickly unannounced unlike TF
If that lane has no wards, and his lane has it's own cc.
I'd rather be gnaked by Quinn than TF any day.
It honestly doesn't matter that TF ganks are announced... they are too fast for the warning to matter. When is that last time you had a TF port behind you and you had time to react and leave the gank?
I actually like new Quinn. She's a lot more interesting now. Thematically she feels more like quinn/valor team because of her scaling passive, Q marking people with passive, and ult being a duo thing rather than an awkward transformation. I'll probably buy her. Weakness isn't a problem long term.
Of course, I didn't like Quinn at all before. I thought she was pretty boring. I'm actually surprised that they managed to make her fun for me without completely removing half or more of her abilities.
I don't know how she wins duels anymore with a 2 second channel on her ult.
Her laning strength is largely about being able to win a 1v1 all in because her waveclear is less than great. But without the blind or the ult I'm not really seeing it.
On November 03 2015 01:13 phyvo wrote: I actually like new Quinn. She's a lot more interesting now. Thematically she feels more like quinn/valor team because of her scaling passive, Q marking people with passive, and ult being a duo thing rather than an awkward transformation. I'll probably buy her. Weakness isn't a problem long term.
Of course, I didn't like Quinn at all before. I thought she was pretty boring. I'm actually surprised that they managed to make her fun for me without completely removing half or more of her abilities.
But they did remove literally half her abilities...
I really liked old Quinn. I honestly don't think there is much she can do now that she didn't do before, but they gutted a lot of her core gameplay and strengths.
She also used to have an interrupt on her E and the blind on Q. She lost burst damage and utility... no matter how high her dps is now that's almost always a bad trade in a pvp environment.
Maybe I'm just biased because I liked quinn as she was before. I dunno, this doesn't feel like love, just feels... meh.
I think the shoving aspect is the key point regarding Quinn. If she could shove effectively then she could continually threaten side lanes since Tag Team doesn't have a cooldown. Wards or no constantly having to yield to pressure is significant. But without being able to shove you can't do that unless you're murdering the enemy champion.
On November 03 2015 01:31 Seuss wrote: I think the shoving aspect is the key point regarding Quinn. If she could shove effectively then she could continually threaten side lanes since Tag Team doesn't have a cooldown. Wards or no constantly having to yield to pressure is significant. But without being able to shove you can't do that unless you're murdering the enemy champion.
I'd agree with that. If she could Q the whole wave I'd feel a lot better about her, tbh.
But as she stands now, she doesn't have the lane pressure to dick off bot or top any more than a TF could ult on cd, so you might as well just pick AD TF instead if you really want an adc mid who roams. Might as well take the stronger ganks and better teamfight of TF.
If she is to work mid the way they want she needs to be able to shove or atleast clear against champs like Viktor or Azir. Or she needs to be able to push them out of lane, which I just really don't see happening tbh.
That's why she works well top right now, she can bully most top laners and poke em out of lane.
On November 03 2015 02:11 Ketara wrote: She also can't split near as well anymore because she can't nope.jpg ganks by ulting, and she can't ult to burst down towers.
Yeah the 2 second channel time is actually friggen brutal. Feels terrible.
On November 03 2015 01:13 phyvo wrote: I actually like new Quinn. She's a lot more interesting now. Thematically she feels more like quinn/valor team because of her scaling passive, Q marking people with passive, and ult being a duo thing rather than an awkward transformation. I'll probably buy her. Weakness isn't a problem long term.
Of course, I didn't like Quinn at all before. I thought she was pretty boring. I'm actually surprised that they managed to make her fun for me without completely removing half or more of her abilities.
But they did remove literally half her abilities...
I really liked old Quinn. I honestly don't think there is much she can do now that she didn't do before, but they gutted a lot of her core gameplay and strengths.
She also used to have an interrupt on her E and the blind on Q. She lost burst damage and utility... no matter how high her dps is now that's almost always a bad trade in a pvp environment.
Maybe I'm just biased because I liked quinn as she was before. I dunno, this doesn't feel like love, just feels... meh.
I think you're referring to her transformed abilities? From my POV they're almost the same as normal QWE (compared to, say, if they removed the transform abilities for Jayce/Nid/Elise). If you're not referring to them, well, the only whole ability they really removed was R.
But I sympathize. I've been where you are except with the xerath rework. Your points about her being in terrible shape balance-wise are probably valid, but I think those are things that can be solved later. I think someone is bound to be left behind at the start of the patch and we're also bound to have some champs and items be broken. Balance issues may get tempered on the PBE but they don't really get fixed as far as I can tell.
Ahh the xerath rework i loved the old xerath so much.
RIP IN PEACE!
That being said, i am looking at the new talents page, and some of them look really interesting for kiters. 35% increase in movement speed if you can do 30% of damage to a champ? That seems so much on champs like cassio. Ludens echo / rylis and her passive on q, cant wait to try it.
On November 03 2015 01:13 phyvo wrote: I actually like new Quinn. She's a lot more interesting now. Thematically she feels more like quinn/valor team because of her scaling passive, Q marking people with passive, and ult being a duo thing rather than an awkward transformation. I'll probably buy her. Weakness isn't a problem long term.
Of course, I didn't like Quinn at all before. I thought she was pretty boring. I'm actually surprised that they managed to make her fun for me without completely removing half or more of her abilities.
But they did remove literally half her abilities...
I really liked old Quinn. I honestly don't think there is much she can do now that she didn't do before, but they gutted a lot of her core gameplay and strengths.
She also used to have an interrupt on her E and the blind on Q. She lost burst damage and utility... no matter how high her dps is now that's almost always a bad trade in a pvp environment.
Maybe I'm just biased because I liked quinn as she was before. I dunno, this doesn't feel like love, just feels... meh.
I think you're referring to her transformed abilities? From my POV they're almost the same as normal QWE (comared to, say, if they removed the transform abilities for Jayce/Nid/Elise). If you're not referring to them, well, the only whole ability they really removed was R.
But I sympathize. I've been where you are except with the xerath rework. Your points about her being in terrible shape balance-wise are probably valid, but I thing those are things that can be solved later. I think someone is bound to be left behind at the start of things and we're also bound to have some champs and items be broken. Balance issues may get tempered on the PBE but they don't really get fixed as far as I can tell.
Balance problems can be solved later, but in Quinn's case it's not something I think numbers can really "solve", at least not without causing more problems.
As I noted earlier there are basically two ways a mid champion can buy time for themselves to roam:
Out-push their opponent.
Out-fight their opponent.
The problem as I see it is that if you give Quinn the ability to out-fight your typical AP mid despite the fact she effectively has no ultimate for 1v1s, she'll probably be too strong. At the same time, the way her Q functions there's no way to give it reasonable numbers and give her to pushing power she needs to compete with AP mids. Either way her numbers are going to have to be overtuned and that seems like a recipe for problems.
"Doesn't have an ult" is a trivial distinction if Q/E/Harrier are tuned properly for her to duel people, which they're not right now. Whether she can compete with AP mids or not is a question of what her actual position should be given the kit weaknesses.
People immediately jump to conceptual problems when 99% of actual balance is just numbers no matter the kit.
You're correct that most people tend to jump straight to conceptual solutions, but in this case I don't agree that you can simply give her the dueling power she needs in Q/E/Harrier and have her be balanced.
On November 03 2015 07:45 Caiada wrote: People immediately jump to conceptual problems when 99% of actual balance is just numbers no matter the kit.
People jump to conceptual problems when "balanced" numbers appear to imply gameplay patterns that would be considered unhealthy or unfun (either by Riot or by players, usually both).
On November 03 2015 07:52 Seuss wrote: You're correct that most people tend to jump straight to conceptual solutions, but in this case I don't agree that you can simply give her the dueling power she needs in Q/E/Harrier and have her be balanced.
I mean, she'd be "balanced" in that her overall ability to win games would be fair, it would just be super lopsided in a way that would make the game unfun for somebody.
On November 03 2015 07:45 Caiada wrote: "Doesn't have an ult" is a trivial distinction if Q/E/Harrier are tuned properly for her to duel people, which they're not right now. Whether she can compete with AP mids or not is a question of what her actual position should be given the kit weaknesses.
People immediately jump to conceptual problems when 99% of actual balance is just numbers no nomatter the kit.
I would say its the opposite. Most of the issues are conceptual, and sometimes for one or two patches the problems are papered over because the numbers happen to work temporarily.
Lessee... Sion's ult was completely gutted. Taric's old ult (where he healed himself over time and got AD) was gutted. They've pretty much said that Poppy's is going to be gutted. Can't think of anyone else.
Sions ult wasnt his defining ability though. It was just a buff.
I don't remember an old Taric ult. That must have been a long time ago.
There's some really really good posts on the pbe Quinn thread discussing why playing as valor is critical to the theme of the champion and removing that will destroy her identity. I think I agree.
On November 03 2015 07:45 Caiada wrote: People immediately jump to conceptual problems when 99% of actual balance is just numbers no matter the kit.
People jump to conceptual problems when "balanced" numbers appear to imply gameplay patterns that would be considered unhealthy or unfun (either by Riot or by players, usually both).
Its also possible that the structure of the champion makes her strength very sensitive to number changes
A good example of this is linear melee champions. I.E. champions that have a targeted dash to go IN, but nothing to go out with. Their gameplay means that they're either stronger, and so go in and win by virtue of that, or they're weaker and they lose. If they win they get stronger and are stronger forever, if they lose they're weaker and they're weaker forever. There is very little outplay or come back mechanics inherent in the champion. These types of champions are really sensitive to raw value changes since raw value changes will push them over that 'wins the fight fight" edge very quickly
Sion's ult was defining for AD sion. AP Sion basically didn't have an ult though and that can be just as defining to a character (especially, as people pointed out for Quinn, in terms of the limitations it can create).
Old Taric ult was indeed removed quite awhile ago... patch 1.0.0.125, AKA Riven release 2011. It worked similar to Swain ult except it gave you a flat AD bonus and healed you over time as you kept it active. It had a small AD aura too. It was defining in that as long as you kept it on Taric could be really hard to kill. When they first replaced it with the newer, burstier one Taric just started killing people instead.
On November 03 2015 11:13 Goumindong wrote: Its also possible that the structure of the champion makes her strength very sensitive to number changes
A good example of this is linear melee champions. I.E. champions that have a targeted dash to go IN, but nothing to go out with. Their gameplay means that they're either stronger, and so go in and win by virtue of that, or they're weaker and they lose. If they win they get stronger and are stronger forever, if they lose they're weaker and they're weaker forever. There is very little outplay or come back mechanics inherent in the champion. These types of champions are really sensitive to raw value changes since raw value changes will push them over that 'wins the fight fight" edge very quickly
For the most part, champions that's true of are also examples of what I said. A kit that's overly sensitive to numbers changes usually belies a lopsided kit where their gameplay is overly hinged on success/failure in certain gameplay scenarios.
Referring to the bolded part--a champion being overly snowbally one way or the other is an example of a gameplay pattern that is considered unhealthy even if on a broad scale the champion has balanced win percentages.
Maybe the way to go is to allow Quinn Q to go through minions (dealing damage) and only explode on Champions?
They can take away the skystrike damage it s a whole lot of meh.
I'd also prefer for them to add like a 15 seconds CD on her ult and take away the 2s channel time, but that is just me. Its not like she'd be able to use it in a fight anyway, seeing how it dies anytime she takes damage regardless.
On November 03 2015 11:31 iCanada wrote: Maybe the way to go is to allow Quinn Q to go through minions (dealing damage) and only explode on Champions?
They can take away the skystrike damage it s a whole lot of meh.
I'd also prefer for them to add like a 15 seconds CD on her ult and take away the 2s channel time, but that is just me. Its not like she'd be able to use it in a fight anyway, seeing how it dies anytime she takes damage regardless.
You can understand the 2s channel time in the context that the ult has damage, but remove the damage and it frees up the ult to have no channel time which it desperately needs. I like your Q suggestion although I wish we got the blind back t_t
On November 03 2015 11:31 iCanada wrote: Maybe the way to go is to allow Quinn Q to go through minions (dealing damage) and only explode on Champions?
They can take away the skystrike damage it s a whole lot of meh.
I'd also prefer for them to add like a 15 seconds CD on her ult and take away the 2s channel time, but that is just me. Its not like she'd be able to use it in a fight anyway, seeing how it dies anytime she takes damage regardless.
You can understand the 2s channel time in the context that the ult has damage, but remove the damage and it frees up the ult to have no channel time which it desperately needs. I like your Q suggestion although I wish we got the blind back t_t
Yeah man, I know the feels.
Reminds me of the Karma rework and the Xerath rework.
I thought most people didn't like those reworks and they were just some riot employee tunnel visioning on them and then classic riot stubbornness keeping it.
On November 03 2015 11:31 iCanada wrote: Maybe the way to go is to allow Quinn Q to go through minions (dealing damage) and only explode on Champions?
They can take away the skystrike damage it s a whole lot of meh.
I'd also prefer for them to add like a 15 seconds CD on her ult and take away the 2s channel time, but that is just me. Its not like she'd be able to use it in a fight anyway, seeing how it dies anytime she takes damage regardless.
You can understand the 2s channel time in the context that the ult has damage, but remove the damage and it frees up the ult to have no channel time which it desperately needs. I like your Q suggestion although I wish we got the blind back t_t
Personally, I'm glad that the blind is gone, not biased at all, nope. :3
On November 03 2015 14:38 cLutZ wrote: I thought most people didn't like those reworks and they were just some riot employee tunnel visioning on them and then classic riot stubbornness keeping it.
I think that was the consensus around TL, but I think in general most players liked the reworks better.
Karma in particular, but they really bodied her kit. She was way cooler before, imo. Could you imagine old Karma with gold items? She would be my main no questions asked.
The people who actually liked playing Karma/Xerath generally hated their reworks. Opinions varied for everyone else. Karma and Xerath did have significant problems pre-rework, but the reworks didn't so much solve them as steamroll them.
I'm not sure where Quinn stands in relation to them, but my initial impressions haven't been great.
On November 03 2015 14:56 Seuss wrote: The people who actually liked playing Karma/Xerath generally hated their reworks. Opinions varied for everyone else. Karma and Xerath did have significant problems pre-rework, but the reworks didn't so much solve them as steamroll them.
I'm not sure where Quinn stands in relation to them, but my initial impressions haven't been great.
I was unaware that there were people not on TL that liked either old Xerath or old Karma. It kind of hurts that old Karma's biggest problem back then is that she required a gold income, but sucked as a solo-laner... then later they came out with support gold generators. I guess she is sort of the same (the shields & speedboost are good), but that Heal was so game changing, and just never got replaced. They also made her damage less consistent, but gave her trading power. Not the worst thing in the world I guess.
On November 03 2015 11:31 iCanada wrote: Maybe the way to go is to allow Quinn Q to go through minions (dealing damage) and only explode on Champions?
They can take away the skystrike damage it s a whole lot of meh.
I'd also prefer for them to add like a 15 seconds CD on her ult and take away the 2s channel time, but that is just me. Its not like she'd be able to use it in a fight anyway, seeing how it dies anytime she takes damage regardless.
You can understand the 2s channel time in the context that the ult has damage, but remove the damage and it frees up the ult to have no channel time which it desperately needs. I like your Q suggestion although I wish we got the blind back t_t
Personally, I'm glad that the blind is gone, not biased at all, nope. :3
Removing the blind is fine. They can add power somewhere else, she still has an interrupt. It's whatever.
It's changing the ult that people are angry with, I think. Her ult was central to the character feel and was a completely unique mechanic.
Now in the interests of making her more unique they've changed her from being unique to being more like other adcs, while removing a core part of her identity.
Hopefully she gets changed. The pbe feedback thread is entirely people saying they hate it.
I dunno, if she can find some waveclear then I think she will be fine.
Maybe its something where you could rush Statik Shiv? New Shiv deals +50% damage to minions... how does Harrier work with shiv lightning? Does it count as a "crit"?
That being said, you still kind of want to be able to roam before the 10 minute mark if you are picking a champion solely for "teh roams".
It is kind of confusing to me that they say she is "the" map pressure ADC yet she isn't supposed to be able to splitpush or duel. Maybe I'm just bad or niave, but isn't that exactly the point of map pressure? If I am not causing threat to kill someone (duel) or take an objective (splitpush)... how can you say I have map pressure? Seems like a strange comment to me.
Harrier is an enhanced auto like a nasus Q, its not a crit.
And yeah I agree. Mobility split push ADC is what she is on live because she has duelling power. They're taking that away in favor of more mobility. But mobility to move where?
Old Karma was fine as a solo laner because she could burst so hard. She'd waveclear a lot, be hard to kill, and... yeah, she'd suck against Xerath or Ziggs, and need gold. But she'd be really good at staying alive (or keeping people alive) and she'd be super strong in medium range skirmishes.
Between that and her passive, the rework removed a lot of that flavour.
On November 03 2015 14:56 Seuss wrote: The people who actually liked playing Karma/Xerath generally hated their reworks. Opinions varied for everyone else. Karma and Xerath did have significant problems pre-rework, but the reworks didn't so much solve them as steamroll them.
I'm not sure where Quinn stands in relation to them, but my initial impressions haven't been great.
From browsing the old Xerath feedback thread I can say that people there were much more neutral towards the change and willing to work with Riot. Whereas with Quinn thread now you get a lot more people saying that they feel "betrayed" or that Riot doesn't listen to them in the slightest or that Valor isn't given enough to do. It's a *lot* more negative. Couldn't find the old Karma thread, I remember ol' Smash Gizmo saying she needed a rework though.
Yeah, but that's in part because Xerath players knew a rework was 100% necessary, and in part because a lot of the feedback came from players who didn't like old Xerath. Later in the thread there's actually a heated argument where someone tells the "500 die hard" Xerath players to deal with it.
Quinn's feedback is probably more universally negative because there's basically no reason for anyone to like it. If you liked old Quinn it sucks, if you didn't like old Quinn it still sucks.
They're taking one of the most unique champions in the game and absolutely the most unique ADC and making her less unique in a push to make adcs more unique.
I'm sad thinking about it.
The rioter working on her says in the thread he wants her to be a mid laner. There's no way she will work as a mid without better waveclear, IMO.
On November 04 2015 00:46 ticklishmusic wrote: I really liked old Xerath, new Xerath is okay though
I barely remember old Karma
Honestly Xerath is a push for me as far as old vs. new. They did do an ok job of keeping his siege mage identity even if you don't like the particular mechanics. This Quinn change though looks like a bulldoze of a job. It totally sucks when Riot misses the ball completely on a rework.
On November 03 2015 14:38 cLutZ wrote: I thought most people didn't like those reworks and they were just some riot employee tunnel visioning on them and then classic riot stubbornness keeping it.
I mean, if all you look at is five or six personalities on LL.... sure.
Old Karma sucked and new Karma sucks; they have no idea what to do with the concept. Xerath, meh, I'm over arguing about that rework.
A number of people still think old Sion was better. All the old Sion players, unsurprisingly. I can't wait for this same thread to happen when Poppy's tire fire of an ult gets thrown in the trash heap.
Old Quinn's ult was bad and boring and I hate the fact anyone is defending it, but it's destined to be another Xerath scenario. The only people that played them are going to hate the shit out of it. She will find a new audience, hopefully coming out a little better designed and a little more functional (once this rework is much better tuned.)
Well, prepare for the Riot lovefest because the only thing I dislike of the changes is premades being able to do ranked. But overall it's a bunch of great moves.
On November 03 2015 14:38 cLutZ wrote: I thought most people didn't like those reworks and they were just some riot employee tunnel visioning on them and then classic riot stubbornness keeping it.
I mean, if all you look at is five or six personalities on LL.... sure.
Old Karma sucked and new Karma sucks; they have no idea what to do with the concept. Xerath, meh, I'm over arguing about that rework.
A number of people still think old Sion was better. All the old Sion players, unsurprisingly. I can't wait for this same thread to happen when Poppy's tire fire of an ult gets thrown in the trash heap.
Old Quinn's ult was bad and boring and I hate the fact anyone is defending it, but it's destined to be another Xerath scenario. The only people that played them are going to hate the shit out of it. She will find a new audience, hopefully coming out a little better designed and a little more functional (once this rework is much better tuned.)
LL loves to harp on mechanical uniqueness.
This is one of the first times I've ever really gotten on Riot about this shit. I'm normally the guy calling everybody on LL dumb.
Quinn's ult, if it felt boring, was because they didn't do enough with it. It's not because it was unworkable.
There's one champion with a similar mechanix (Gnar), and he doesn't have a boring transformation. Gnar is imo a really cool champion who is exciting to watch in games, and his transformation feels very significant.
Some people here think Gnar is a problematic champion, and I'm not sure I'd agree, but I'd argue that if he is problematic its because he's manaless, not because he transforms. Quinn isn't manaless.
Anyway, I'm sure Riot can find a way to balance the new Quinn. It doesn't sound like she's balanced right now. But that's not my main issue with the rework.
My main issues are that:
1 - It removes a lot of her thematic feel to remove Valor from the gameplay. They're supposed to be a team, now Valor is like a pet instead of like half of the champion. That's a big deal.
If they decided Annie wasnt going to have Tibbers anymore or heimerdinger wasn't going to place turrets or azir wasn't going to have sand soldiers, people would be pissed too.
2 - the Valor transformation was unique. She was already the most unique ADC. The only champion in the game she is similar to is Gnar, but even then they are different because Gnar transforms into a tank and she transforms into an Assassin.
If it was boring it was boring because they didn't go far enough with that concept, not because it was unworkable. Gnars transformation is clearly not boring.
But now, under the banner of making things more unique, they've taken away her unique transformation, and turned her into what's rightly being called a de facto AD Twisted Fate.
Even if they balance it, she's just not going to be the same champion anymore. They always say that when they do reworks they want the champion to feel the same.
Additionally, because these bounties are compounded by the assist pool - a losing team can easily be behind simply due to an assassin doing his job too well - as he frequently deprives his team of assist pool bonuses on high profile targets.
Additionally, because these bounties are compounded by the assist pool - a losing team can easily be behind simply due to an assassin doing his job too well - as he frequently deprives his team of assist pool bonuses on high profile targets.
Riot in nutshell.
I think they mean an Assassin on the team putting his team behind by doing too well and denying his team assist gold?
I love those changes, especially the new Champ select. I don't even mind party queue in ranked as long as they keep the restriction on grouping with players more than a tier away from you.
Playing 3+ roles to fill, I'm still miffed that I'll have to choose two of them or risky having to play AD (which I'm legit Silver at), instead of maintaining my ability to just decide where I go on the fly. I hope they don't make it mandatory to select which champion you intend to play either.
But I'm the exception so gotta bite the bullet, uh...
take notes on how to kill a game, ill be surprised if season 6 isnt the beginning of this game's downfall. So many questionable moves. i can see why they are investing so much in LCS beceause the drama there is quickly becoming more entertaining then the actual game
On November 04 2015 16:28 Celial wrote: I dont wanna play SOLOQUEUE grouped with 4stacks... I dont want that stacks get more IP than me. I dont want that stacks get more keys than me.
Might be time to give up playing league and finally grow up...
you might not want it, but encouraging people to play together is how the playerbase keeps playing the game for a long time.
On November 04 2015 16:30 Ketara wrote: Yeah as much as I am fairly neutral about that change, being the one guy in a four stack is destined to be toxic as fuck.
Probably the result is playing ranked without a duo is a bad idea.
it's even harder to stand up against a 4stack with the removal of disco nunu
The group change looks great to me in theory. I like playing in groups more than solo queue and I only play with 5-6 people regularly. This means a lot of times there will be 3-4 people online around my rank who would play ranked. It's a nice option to have if they implement the matchmaking well.
I don't see any problem with groups of 4. I don't know why everyone seems to think that being part of a group of four automatically makes you a raging douchebag who will constantly rage at the solo player. I don't see very many people who actually rage, and I doubt I will see that many more if there are larger groups, especially because there probably won't be many four stacks.
I am not sure I got it, So you can play 3, 4, even 5 people together like in normal, there will be no tier restrictions, so you can have diamonds&bronzes together, then you are matched against another group (whatever this means) which is not calculated based on average MMR for the team, but different (did not understand how) and then each person receives individual reward/penalty for win/lose? yes?
The ranked improvements page mentions that you'd still have to be "of similar rank to your queue-buddies", so maybe the tier restriction is still there?
On November 04 2015 17:53 M2 wrote: I am not sure I got it, So you can play 3, 4, even 5 people together like in normal, there will be no tier restrictions, so you can have diamonds&bronzes together, then you are matched against another group (whatever this means) which is not calculated based on average MMR for the team, but different (did not understand how) and then each person receives individual reward/penalty for win/lose? yes?
No?
It sounds like the tier restrictions are still there, and it still uses average MMR for placement.
They just have a system that makes it 95% likely you'll be placed against a premade of the same number of people.
Didn't they recently remove this very same feature (more than 1-2 person queue) from HoTS? they found a lot of problems with it, I hope RITO can do something good with it, I'm hopeful
Honestly I've been playing dota for so long that that just feels natural to me. The game is meant to be a group game not a solo one so it was always weird the primary method of play put emphasis on being solo.
One of the main differences between Dota and Lol is that Dota has voice communication, which more or less evens out non-group members impact in a group game
On November 04 2015 18:36 Numy wrote: Honestly I've been playing dota for so long that that just feels natural to me. The game is meant to be a group game not a solo one so it was always weird the primary method of play put emphasis on being solo.
I'm not that familiar with the dota matchmaking system, but I remember hearing that you can't queue for ranked matches as 4 players?
On November 04 2015 18:40 M2 wrote: One of the main differences between Dota and Lol is that Dota has voice communication, which more or less evens out non-group members impact in a group game
Well I'm talking about War3 dota and Dota 2 here. That's only true for Dota 2. From my experience voice chat isn't that important. I never use it and typically mute people pretty quickly. Occasionally you'll get some people that do use it well and then I just respond in text and with pings. Guess that difference does matter a bit. I think League players have just been playing for years now in the incorrect environment which means any kind of shift to more group play is met with harsh outcry. Same thing when they changed the game to focus less on 1 player snowballing out of control to win. People complained endlessly that they could no longer "carry".
Anyway the system may or may not suck, I'm optimistic though.
On November 04 2015 18:36 Numy wrote: Honestly I've been playing dota for so long that that just feels natural to me. The game is meant to be a group game not a solo one so it was always weird the primary method of play put emphasis on being solo.
I'm not that familiar with the dota matchmaking system, but I remember hearing that you can't queue for ranked matches as 4 players?
I'm not sure how it works currently but when I played you could. There's Group ranked MMR and Solo MMR. Your personal rating is independent but the queues themselves aren't. Dota mentality is a bit different, or at least it used to be. Pub games were never viewed as "real way to play" where CM 5v5 is always that compared to League where pub play is viewed as the game. So ranked queue in Dota wasn't as huge a deal as it is in league. Helps that there are inhouse leagues(well used to be) and far easier ways for amateurs to get into comp scene with millions of small tournies.
I mean CSGO works exactly like the league thing they doing does and that's also fine. Although again there's voice chat and inhouse leagues as well as amateur scene. Riot really needed to not kill the amateur scene.
On November 04 2015 18:36 Numy wrote: Honestly I've been playing dota for so long that that just feels natural to me. The game is meant to be a group game not a solo one so it was always weird the primary method of play put emphasis on being solo.
the only emphasis is from it being you get solo rating not team. That is the whole point. Why is your solo rating tied to who your friends are. This change would make soloq even more meaningless than it already is. Also I see no change in lp gain depending on which side you ar on which is a huge problem.
Red side is strictly superior. You get a higher lp team and you gain more/lose less lp...
This is infuriating beyond belief. Everything seemed se good until this announcement. I played a lot of normal draft in my time, and playing with 3 or 4 -men premades were hell most of the time. But now I can lose lp for it, not to mention it won't matter now hard hard I try, someone who is a tier weaker than me could be a tier higher than me on ladder, because he is winning his 5-men premade ranked games. Sounds a lot of fun.
If it goes through as it is now, I'll definitely delete the game for good and stick to watching LCS.
On November 04 2015 19:21 Volband wrote: This is infuriating beyond belief. Everything seemed se good until this announcement. I played a lot of normal draft in my time, and playing with 3 or 4 -men premades were hell most of the time. But now I can lose lp for it, not to mention it won't matter now hard hard I try, someone who is a tier weaker than me could be a tier higher than me on ladder, because he is winning his 5-men premade ranked games. Sounds a lot of fun.
If it goes through as it is now, I'll definitely delete the game for good and stick to watching LCS.
My experience in other games is that 5 man premades are far harder to win at then just playing solo unless you get a team of 5 people that all deserve to be at their rank. You'll get matched up against 5 more often than if you were in a smaller party so any weak links tend to make you lose games a lot harder.
On November 04 2015 19:29 M2 wrote: am I the only one here who finds it attractive and interesting to try to carry 4 premade randoms instead of 4 complete randoms
If you like a challenge, sure. But part of soloque's charm were the individuals. I loved to hate so many people. I could tell countless funny and interesting stories about the random people I met at soloqueue, or the banters between them/us.
Meeting with a 3/4-men premade will have nothing of it. They will have a game plan, and will try to force you to comply - and if you want to have a shot at winning, you have to. Also, if you piss one of them off, all of them just gonna jump on you.
Sure, every now and then you will meet the nicest 3/4 people you've ever known, but that's it.
On November 04 2015 19:21 Volband wrote: This is infuriating beyond belief. Everything seemed se good until this announcement. I played a lot of normal draft in my time, and playing with 3 or 4 -men premades were hell most of the time. But now I can lose lp for it, not to mention it won't matter now hard hard I try, someone who is a tier weaker than me could be a tier higher than me on ladder, because he is winning his 5-men premade ranked games. Sounds a lot of fun.
If it goes through as it is now, I'll definitely delete the game for good and stick to watching LCS.
My experience in other games is that 5 man premades are far harder to win at then just playing solo unless you get a team of 5 people that all deserve to be at their rank. You'll get matched up against 5 more often than if you were in a smaller party so any weak links tend to make you lose games a lot harder.
People need to calm down a bit.
I see, so that's why ranked 5 plat teams have sometimes a silver player in their ranks. Can't wait for looking at the ladder and seeing how many shitters are at my rank, just because they have a good 5v5 strategy. IN "SOLO QUEUE".
Holy cow, I'm just destroyed on the inside.
Edit: You know, whether I was bronze or dia, I LOVED the feeling of progress, and the fact that I could pride myself in it. Oh, cool, I am consistently better now and it reflects on my ladder rank! Sweet! But it's all gone now, rankings lose almost every meaning, and even the gaming experience gets worse for those who won't play with premade buddies. It's a serious lose-lose for players like me.
Edit2: And even if I was on the other side of the coin, getting to masters with a 5man premade - 4of those guys would be former challanger or master players of course, basically carrying me, while I just play something easy and try not to feed more than 3 kills -, I wouldn't feel good. There would be literally no reason for me to play ranked at all, and that's some huge feat from Riot, because I would've swallowed a lot of bullshit from them. After all, I played support even in season 2, when playing support was basically some hardcore BDSM-simulator.
I mean, I pretty much only play normals because I prefer to play with friends, it never really bothered me that it had to be unranked but I guess I'll play more ranked now? I guess it depends on what my friends want to do because I don't really care about it that much.
I'm waaay more concerned about the global bounty system.
On November 04 2015 19:21 Volband wrote: This is infuriating beyond belief. Everything seemed se good until this announcement. I played a lot of normal draft in my time, and playing with 3 or 4 -men premades were hell most of the time. But now I can lose lp for it, not to mention it won't matter now hard hard I try, someone who is a tier weaker than me could be a tier higher than me on ladder, because he is winning his 5-men premade ranked games. Sounds a lot of fun.
If it goes through as it is now, I'll definitely delete the game for good and stick to watching LCS.
My experience in other games is that 5 man premades are far harder to win at then just playing solo unless you get a team of 5 people that all deserve to be at their rank. You'll get matched up against 5 more often than if you were in a smaller party so any weak links tend to make you lose games a lot harder.
People need to calm down a bit.
I see, so that's why ranked 5 plat teams have sometimes a silver player in their ranks. Can't wait for looking at the ladder and seeing how many shitters are at my rank, just because they have a good 5v5 strategy. IN "SOLO QUEUE".
Holy cow, I'm just destroyed on the inside.
I think you need to go sit down and do something else. People hardly play Ranked 5v5 so the overall ranking of it is pretty bad. Again this is just from my experience in games that have this at a competitive level, playing as a team of people not at the rank you playing vs a team that is is very difficult. If you manage to win in that situation then well those people are really good.
The change may be terrible or it may not be. Riot I'm sure will handle it if it does turn out to not work but you have to remember they changing a lot about the system itself so it may be fine. Based on my experiences else where it's not the end of the world as many people think and it may even be forgotten about in a few months when people actually start playing with it instead of just talking about the end of the world based on notes.
I do laugh how people always complain how Riot babysits the community by using "toxicity" as an excuse then as soon as they do something the community lashes out saying how "toxic" it's going to be.
Well obviously I need to do something else if Riot completely destroys solo queue and the meaning of ranks.
What I love however, that because many people qq over everything, it spawns a lot of white knights for Riot, who even defend them when they are planning something as bollocks as this ranked change. You can't possibly say "just play sth else" after I played and enjpyed solo queue for 3 seasons (skipped S5, was burnt out). I should not be forced to enjoy this not team ranked team ranked.
Can't even take anyone seriously who thinks me being on the same ladder as those who constantly play with 4/5-men premades is perfectly fine.
Watching someone go crazy over such a beneficial change is like looking at myself in a time machine. I know the place it's coming from but it's like looking at an alternate reality.
I can't understand why people would think this is so terrible. More people are going to be playing with people they want to play with. That is unquestionably a good thing for the health of a game that is predicated on teamwork and communication.
On November 04 2015 20:09 Amarok wrote: Watching someone go crazy over such a beneficial change is like looking at myself in a time machine. I know the place it's coming from but it's like looking at an alternate reality.
I can't understand why people would think this is so terrible. More people are going to be playing with people they want to play with. That is unquestionably a good thing for the health of a game that is predicated on teamwork and communication.
You are right. This game is about team work, so the idea of someone wanting to play alone is ridiculous. It's not beneficial for him or his teammates, and it's a complete joke he can (more or less) be aware of his skill level by looking at his ranking after ~150 games played at least.
There are so many objectives and potential in perfect team plays, that not only I would erase solo and even duoq (since 2 is still less than 3), I would make a new ranked system, where even if you queue up as 3 or 4-men premades, you have a 15-20 minutes "lounge" time to get to know the random people. They can queue up as solo or duo, but if they refuse to be assimilated by the end of the lounge time, they are kicked from the queue and can not play for 2 hours. If they agree, you can discuss strategies, exchange skype or TS2 adresses and such.
I love this. I had trouble seeing why being forced into this premade system was bad, but now I realized I was weak and naive. I was playing this game wrong for almost 4 years now, and when Riot tries to help my sorry ass, I start to cry and complain.
(I need to watch some Bob Ross, because reading ridiculous posts like yours coming from someone who obviously never valued solo queue for much is just the tip of the iceberg.)
if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
that is literally how they claim that the matchmaking will be. in practice i can't say if it'll happen. but it seems extremely unlikely that you'll be the one guy with a 4man team.
if you are, just stomp the game and carry the other 4 then flame them for not playing solo or something. and unlike blind pick, how the new champion select is set up, the 4man cannot force you into a role that you don't want to play.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
that is literally how they claim that the matchmaking will be. in practice i can't say if it'll happen. but it seems extremely unlikely that you'll be the one guy with a 4man team.
if you are, just stomp the game and carry the other 4 then flame them for not playing solo or something.
But for every 4-man group that queues up, there HAS to be a solo player who teams with them. Otherwise it wouldn't be a 5v5 game, so the likelihood of becoming the solo guy with a 4stack on his team only depends on the ratio between solo players and 4stacks.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
that is literally how they claim that the matchmaking will be. in practice i can't say if it'll happen. but it seems extremely unlikely that you'll be the one guy with a 4man team.
if you are, just stomp the game and carry the other 4 then flame them for not playing solo or something.
But for every 4-man group that queues up, there HAS to be a solo player who teams with them. Otherwise it wouldn't be a 5v5 game, so the likelihood of becoming the solo guy with a 4stack on his team only depends on the ratio between solo players and 4stacks.
yeah, but if you're looking at like one in 25 games that you are the one guy, the net effect on your elo is basically nothing
the only real issue i see with this system is how it will affect master+ queues when the playerbase gets significantly smaller and you end up with LCS level groups in solo queue
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
that is literally how they claim that the matchmaking will be. in practice i can't say if it'll happen. but it seems extremely unlikely that you'll be the one guy with a 4man team.
if you are, just stomp the game and carry the other 4 then flame them for not playing solo or something.
Bright options. The only thing missing is a "Thanks Rito for letting me queue up alone to begin with!" button which I have to press if I want to claim my lp. If I lose, the message would read "This is what you get you filthy idiot for playing alone. You just ruined 3/4 quality people's game." and I could only answer with "I'm sorry."
All of this, after being matched with a 4-men premade, who won't type shit in chat, because they are using some kind of voice comm., so I'm just out of the loop, and I don't even have the chance to just ignore one baddy and convince the others to ignore him, because buddies won't leave their friends behind.
If Riot is hiring, you should send an application.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
That makes zero sense, because someone has to be the odd-one in 4-men premades, and two random people have to be the odd-ones in 3-men premades. But if Riot made a system where every solo player is matched with other solo (or duo) players, then that is some next level programming.
But don't forget, even in this impossible scenario, you are still sharing the same ranks with the ones who are playing as 2+ premades, so while your game experience would remain the same, the meaning of ranked (aka RANKS) would lose its' sense of purpose.
that is literally how they claim that the matchmaking will be. in practice i can't say if it'll happen. but it seems extremely unlikely that you'll be the one guy with a 4man team.
if you are, just stomp the game and carry the other 4 then flame them for not playing solo or something.
But for every 4-man group that queues up, there HAS to be a solo player who teams with them. Otherwise it wouldn't be a 5v5 game, so the likelihood of becoming the solo guy with a 4stack on his team only depends on the ratio between solo players and 4stacks.
yeah, but if you're looking at like one in 25 games that you are the one guy, the net effect on your elo is basically nothing
There are 3-men premades too where are 2-2 randoms, so you have to count those in too.
And you are still not adressing the issue of shared ladder.
On November 04 2015 20:00 Volband wrote: Well obviously I need to do something else if Riot completely destroys solo queue and the meaning of ranks.
What I love however, that because many people qq over everything, it spawns a lot of white knights for Riot, who even defend them when they are planning something as bollocks as this ranked change. You can't possibly say "just play sth else" after I played and enjpyed solo queue for 3 seasons (skipped S5, was burnt out). I should not be forced to enjoy this not team ranked team ranked.
Can't even take anyone seriously who thinks me being on the same ladder as those who constantly play with 4/5-men premades is perfectly fine.
I guess you don't frequent LL enough if you going to try dismiss people as "white knights for Riot". We bash Riot more than anyone else lol. It just so happens I don't really think this change is as horrible as you do. I know it's inconceivable people can have differing opinions without having some kind of twisted moral agenda.
You are mad, incredibly so. Your posting speaks of someone blowing a fuse. That's why I suggested you chill out a bit then formulate your concerns. No one benefits from angry discussion.
what makes you think that if you queue solo, you won't be the one guy in almost every single game? Someone has to be you know, who else if not the guy who ranks solo?
On November 04 2015 20:44 M2 wrote: what makes you think that if you queue solo, you won't be the one guy in almost every single game? Someone has to be you know, who else if not the guy who ranks solo?
the larger ratio of solo to 4man's is what prevents it from always being you every game. additionally the fact that the queue is supposed to prioritize matching solo players with and against solo players.
Volband you asked earlier if Dota 2 had 4 man queues. Looks like since I played in 4 man they changed it so you can only part as 1-3 and 5 in ranked queue. Would this one change make you less upset?
On November 04 2015 20:00 Volband wrote: Well obviously I need to do something else if Riot completely destroys solo queue and the meaning of ranks.
What I love however, that because many people qq over everything, it spawns a lot of white knights for Riot, who even defend them when they are planning something as bollocks as this ranked change. You can't possibly say "just play sth else" after I played and enjpyed solo queue for 3 seasons (skipped S5, was burnt out). I should not be forced to enjoy this not team ranked team ranked.
Can't even take anyone seriously who thinks me being on the same ladder as those who constantly play with 4/5-men premades is perfectly fine.
I guess you don't frequent LL enough if you going to try dismiss people as "white knights for Riot". We bash Riot more than anyone else lol. It just so happens I don't really think this change is as horrible as you do. I know it's inconceivable people can have differing opinions without having some kind of twisted moral agenda.
You are mad, incredibly so. Your posting speaks of someone blowing a fuse. That's why I suggested you chill out a bit then formulate your concerns. No one benefits from angry discussion.
Me being angry has nothing to do with this discussion. I laid out my concerns, which are unadressable, because these are facts: - I will be forced to play with 3 or 4-men premades. Period. - I will share the same ladder as people playing in 3, 4, or the biggest joke, 5-men premades. Period.
I am angry, but I am still stating the facts which will ruin the solo queue experience, and having to listen to hippy talks like some of you guys make here is just ridiculous. You tell me to calm down, while ignore the guy who said this change is beneficial because it's a team game and it's meant to be played that way? Like, within 24 hours solo queuers became the obstacle of something great and we are actually the problem? Really?
In my book, being ignorant is a much more serious "crime" in an argument, than being mad. You too completely ignore the fact that #soloqueuelivesmatter, and just spam the PR talk. You yourself said Dota2 works this way too with different ladders. Even your own example is against you, even if you typed it out calmly.
On November 04 2015 20:49 Numy wrote: Volband you asked earlier if Dota 2 had 4 man queues. Looks like since I played in 4 man they changed it so you can only part as 1-3 and 5 in ranked queue. Would this one change make you less upset?
A seperate ladder is a must. Until it's not done, there is no point of discussing the new ranked system any further. (Solo and duo could still share the same ladder though)
If it's done, then I wouldn't be happy for the 3-men premades, but that is something where I'd need to have actual experience with them to know if it's really that bad or not. I believe it would suck game experience wise for the solo players, but I'd give it a pass because in return, we get a nice new way to queue up and get our favorite positions all the time.
On November 04 2015 20:44 M2 wrote: what makes you think that if you queue solo, you won't be the one guy in almost every single game? Someone has to be you know, who else if not the guy who ranks solo?
the larger ratio of solo to 4man's is what prevents it from always being you every game. additionally the fact that the queue is supposed to prioritize matching solo players with and against solo players.
Man, there are 3-men premades too, and a 3-men premade vs a 3-men premade means 4 solo players total in one game. Yes, you have to be quite unlucky to be matched with a 4-men premade, but 3-men will be definitely more common, and the chances to get in there as a solo player are DOUBLED compared to getting into 4-men.
And don't forget you have to add these up, because both are pretty much nightmare for solo people (unless they play top lane, I guess), and then you'll be closer to the truth.
On November 04 2015 20:49 Numy wrote: Volband you asked earlier if Dota 2 had 4 man queues. Looks like since I played in 4 man they changed it so you can only part as 1-3 and 5 in ranked queue. Would this one change make you less upset?
I remember when they made this change, we were furious, because we were playing as 4 for like 5 years :p
But I can see that being one lonely guy in full stack is pretty sad sometimes.
On November 04 2015 21:01 Numy wrote: Dota 2 doesn't have different ladders, merely different mmr. CSGO doesn't have either of those things, just one queue.
The guy who replied to you said you get solo rating. I don't play Dota so I assumed it's like a different ladder, but now I don't understand.
CS:GO is fine, I don't mind a system like that in games like that. It's not the place for LoL however, where the solo experience is day and night compared to the premade one.
On November 04 2015 20:49 Numy wrote: Volband you asked earlier if Dota 2 had 4 man queues. Looks like since I played in 4 man they changed it so you can only part as 1-3 and 5 in ranked queue. Would this one change make you less upset?
I remember when they made this change, we were furious, because we were playing as 4 for like 5 years :p
But I can see that being one lonely guy in full stack is pretty sad sometimes.
I only really play in 2-3 man stacks so didn't even realize this change. League has always felt like a rather lonely game to me so if this change helps that then I don't mind. Always found it weird how pub games were so serious in league where as 5v5 was almost forgotten anyway.
On November 04 2015 21:01 Numy wrote: Dota 2 doesn't have different ladders, merely different mmr. CSGO doesn't have either of those things, just one queue.
The guy who replied to you said you get solo rating. I don't play Dota so I assumed it's like a different ladder, but now I don't understand.
CS:GO is fine, I don't mind a system like that in games like that. It's not the place for LoL however, where the solo experience is day and night compared to the premade one.
Think of it as two separate ladder points but all within the same player pool. So there's two "ladders" in the sense that people get points differently if they queue party or solo but they all play in the same game. So if you queue solo you may still land up in a team with 3 man party but you'll win/lose MMR on your "Solo rating" instead of "Party rating"
On November 04 2015 20:49 Numy wrote: Volband you asked earlier if Dota 2 had 4 man queues. Looks like since I played in 4 man they changed it so you can only part as 1-3 and 5 in ranked queue. Would this one change make you less upset?
I remember when they made this change, we were furious, because we were playing as 4 for like 5 years :p
But I can see that being one lonely guy in full stack is pretty sad sometimes.
I only really play in 2-3 man stacks so didn't even realize this change. League has always felt like a rather lonely game to me so if this change helps that then I don't mind. Always found it weird how pub games were so serious in league where as 5v5 was almost forgotten anyway.
On November 04 2015 21:01 Numy wrote: Dota 2 doesn't have different ladders, merely different mmr. CSGO doesn't have either of those things, just one queue.
The guy who replied to you said you get solo rating. I don't play Dota so I assumed it's like a different ladder, but now I don't understand.
CS:GO is fine, I don't mind a system like that in games like that. It's not the place for LoL however, where the solo experience is day and night compared to the premade one.
Think of it as two separate ladder points but all within the same player pool. So there's two "ladders" in the sense that people get points differently if they queue party or solo but they all play in the same game. So if you queue solo you may still land up in a team with 3 man party but you'll win/lose MMR on your "Solo rating" instead of "Party rating"
Well, if you get more points for being solo, I guess it can work. No 4 or 5-men premades, still though. There's team ranked for 5 players, and 4 is just a torture for the solo player. 3 should be enough for people like you to not feel lonely, compared to solo or duo.
On November 04 2015 21:09 Amarok wrote: Lol. Hippy guy. That's pretty funny.
Anyway, no need to be a dick about it. People disagree with you on the internet sometimes. It happens. It's not about being ignorant or stupid.
Disagreeing with me won't make anyone ignorant. Typing out the stuff you did in the previous page, however, do.
(If you get paid for it though, I can't blame you. I'd probably take the offer as well.)
5v5 isnt played much because it is hard to get 5 people who are at an even close to a similar level to play frequently. Solo is just more convenient and by adding teams it ruins the whole idea. Duo needs to be removed as well but instead riot are going full retard.
dunno where you got the idea people dont think soloq is a joke
On November 04 2015 21:10 Frolossus wrote: i think that because of how the draft is going to be structured these issues won't be prominent enough to worry about
Holy shit...... The only thing he addressed people like me with is saying he knows it will frustrate us. Damn, Lyte, thanks, now I feel better!
You guys seriously shouldn't blame anyone for being angry at Riot, when in a 723 words long post all we get is that they are aware that they are fucking us over.
On November 04 2015 21:15 nafta wrote: 5v5 isnt played much because it is hard to get 5 people who are at an even close to a similar level to play frequently. Solo is just more convenient and by adding teams it ruins the whole idea. Duo needs to be removed as well but instead riot are going full retard.
I think duo is fine. It has just as many benefit as drawbacks. The problem starts at 3, where the balance just completely breaks, and at 4 and 5 it is not even worth mentioning. I'm happy they get a party bonus though, well-deserved, really. What a joke.
On November 04 2015 21:10 Volband wrote: Disagreeing with me won't make anyone ignorant. Typing out the stuff you did in the previous page, however, do.
No it really isn't. It's about actually having a broader perspective than yours.
It seems to me you place an enormous value on your league ranking as a mark of your personal performance. That is and always has been flawed, not because the system doesn't eventually get you to where you deserve to be, but because playing with randoms is often a horrible experience that turns people off long before they get there. Allowing people to queue up with as many people as they have available will mean less people playing with people they don't know, hell it might even start to force people to communicate and make friends. What a crazy prospect eh.
The system now encourages you to group. If you can't see how that's a positive for a game with an enormous social component, well maybe you'll come to when the red mist clears.
Besides, the system works in DotA2. If nothing else that proves it won't be the end of the world and maybe people should give it a shot before flipping out.
On November 04 2015 21:10 Volband wrote: Disagreeing with me won't make anyone ignorant. Typing out the stuff you did in the previous page, however, do.
No it really isn't. It's about actually having a broader perspective than yours.
It seems to me you place an enormous value on your league ranking as a mark of your personal performance. That is and always has been flawed, not because the system doesn't eventually get you to where you deserve to be, but because playing with randoms is often a horrible experience that turns people off long before they get there. Allowing people to queue up with as many people as they have available will mean less people playing with people they don't know, hell it might even start to force people to communicate and make friends. What a crazy prospect eh.
The system now encourages you to group. If you can't see how that's a positive for a game with an enormous social component, well maybe you'll come to when the red mist clears.
Besides, the system works in DotA2. If nothing else that proves it won't be the end of the world and maybe people should give it a shot before flipping out.
Your broader perspective means ignoring mine, and your reasoning is probably because your perspective is better, which is entirely subjective. You casually dismiss the fact, that I will not be able to play the game I enjoyed for years now. And it's not just some qq because my favorite champion got reworked or nerfed for example. No, I am denied to play solo queue and I am denied to have a ranking system where I can follow my own progress. I mean, I guess I can use it for that, but how much will it matter, when the ranks itself are inflated? Why I have to do 3 times as much as some idiot in premade 5s?
Communication has been the part of soloqueue, you just have to ignore bronze, silver and low gold. No, we did not craft sick 5-men startegies, obviously, but we helped each other, communicated and sometimes pulled off some sick comeback, purely because we were there for each other. Why am I forced to go to the voice comm of the 3/4-men premade if I want to win? It's not that I am anti-social, but I don't feel well at all when I'm almost literally forced to interact with a group of friends I don't even know of. Is this supposed to be the game in its' full glory? Give me a break.
Is it too much for ask to have a decent solo experience, and not getting barked at for not following the 3>2 or 4>1 rule? Is it too much to ask to have a ladder, where I can be proud of my "internet points"?
This system doesn't encourage me to group, it encourages me to surrender at others will. "Pick this or that please, because we always play this comp! Come mid Volband, we are 3/4, so don't be the odd one out! We are going to do Baron, so you will come, NOW! All right, we think it's lost se we are just going to surrender it, thanks bye."
Edit: and what hurts me the most, that while you guys have plenty of way to play as 3/4/5 friends, you want this dynamic ranked so badly, so you can get meaningless lp (for the same thing you can do now in team builder or fun ranked 5s), because let's face it, it is meaningless when you can just queue up as a big group, but you still want it, despite knowing it will entirely erase the solo experience many of us liked and loved for years. You act like the kid who has 99 mathboxes, but now wants my only one, because he doesn't have that one.
Maybe try to start conversations on grounds that aren't "you're ignorant" if you don't want to be "casually dismissed". There's plenty of people here making pretty good points that warrant good discussion, there's no need to be so ragey.
Anyway I agree that the experience may not be as satisfying for someone who only wants to play solo, I just don't think that catering to the solo player is a good way to improve the health of a game like this.
I also don't think premades are going to be unable to be communicated with. These are the same people you're able to communicate with in solo queue currently so why should anything change? And if you do get the odd occasion where a premade is toxic how does that differ to the current environment? There's toxic assholes everywhere in the solo/duo environment. Write that game off and move on like you would currently.
Tbh your only point is "this is a team game". But you are basically ruining soloq. Why not add a new game mode where you que as 2/3 and leave solo que? 4man should just not exist. It is retarded.
On November 04 2015 21:48 Amarok wrote: Maybe try to start conversations on grounds that aren't "you're ignorant" if you don't want to be "casually dismissed". There's plenty of people here making pretty good points that warrant good discussion, there's no need to be so ragey.
Anyway I agree that the experience may not be as satisfying for someone who only wants to play solo, I just don't think that catering to the solo player is a good way to improve the health of a game like this.
I also don't think premades are going to be unable to be communicated with. These are the same people you're able to communicate with in solo queue currently so why should anything change? And if you do get the odd occasion where a premade is toxic how does that differ to the current environment? There's toxic assholes everywhere in the solo/duo environment. Write that game off and move on like you would currently.
Currently, toxic assholes are not coming in a package.
The biggest complaint about the current ranked system were: 1. only team captains can ban 2. pick order makes for many frustrating situations
Riot addressed these, and then set it all on fire. No one asked for the latter.
And maybe I wouldn't have called you ignorant, if you initial response hadn't been "but it's a team game so it's good!", ignoring the fact that countless people enjoyed and loved the current solo queue, and can't even remember anyone asking for a 5men rankeds or other stupidities like that,
On November 04 2015 21:53 nafta wrote: Tbh your only point is "this is a team game". But you are basically ruining soloq. Why not add a new game mode where you que as 2/3 and leave solo que? 4man should just not exist. It is retarded.
I'm still voting for solo/duo, 3men and 5men, but yes, the right thing to do is to separate it some way. I wouldn't even care if people playing in 3men or 5men would get more IP or stuff like that. All I want is my solo (or duo) queue. If others want to have happy little mini team rankeds, I won't covet it from them, let them have it. Just don't completely kill off the game I loved and known for years now.
On November 04 2015 21:53 nafta wrote: Tbh your only point is "this is a team game". But you are basically ruining soloq. Why not add a new game mode where you que as 2/3 and leave solo que? 4man should just not exist. It is retarded.
Well I think it's a pretty huge point. I honestly think part of the problem with this game has been that many people have a mindset that their performance is more important than the teams and that stems from the fact that people play by themselves most of the time.
And I think the jury is still out on whether this will "ruin" solo queue. 5 mans are going to be matched against 5 mans and they've said the system is going to prioritize putting partial premades against each other. The vast majority of your games are going to be with solo/duos anyway if you play solo. Depends how it works out I guess but I don't think the concept is completely flawed.
On November 04 2015 21:53 nafta wrote: Tbh your only point is "this is a team game". But you are basically ruining soloq. Why not add a new game mode where you que as 2/3 and leave solo que? 4man should just not exist. It is retarded.
Well I think it's a pretty huge point. I honestly think part of the problem with this game has been that many people have a mindset that their performance is more important than the teams and that stems from the fact that people play by themselves most of the time.
And I think the jury is still out on whether this will "ruin" solo queue. 5 mans are going to be matched against 5 mans and they've said the system is going to prioritize putting partial premades against each other. The vast majority of your games are going to be with solo/duos anyway if you play solo. Depends how it works out I guess but I don't think the concept is completely flawed.
YEA GEE I WONDER WHY PEOPLE PREFER TO DO THINGS THEMSELVES RATHER THAN HOPE RANDOM STRANGERS OVER THE INTERNET ARE COMPETENT? WHAT AN INSANE CONCEPT.
Every game of soloq the only constant factor is yourself so obviously you should value your performance more than anythnig else. The jury isn't out. It will not ruin soloq because it will remove it from existance. Yea it says it will try to match premades with each other but when you get to higher than d4 or so that means either your que times will increase or the more likely option is you will have one every game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
Four premade have an absolute power over you, while in solo queue you are all equal. Communication comes after this. You can try to convince your solo queue team mates to do something and fail. Happens. 5 people can go 5 different ways after all. But good luck even having a discussion with a 4-men premade.
Also, in solo queue the blame is not centered around one person. Yes, junglers get a lot of shit, but if your top fails a dive twice and calls out your jungler, the others will most likely defend the jungler (again, not talking about silver elo). Good luck not being blamed in a 4-men premade.
Edit: But le me share with you my normal draft 4men premade experiences as the lonely player in the team:
1. Utter silence in chat. As rebecca Black would say: FUN-FUN-FUN 2. They said they are leaving. They left. All of them. 3. I was first or second pick, last pick said he's going mid. I said no, and I picked mid (yes, this one can't happen, I know). I got called all kinds of racist slurs and such. When the game started, they (with their troll picks) followed me around everywhere, and fed like crazy. At the end they said they are reporting me.
Since you cant get demoted while below plat they might as well combine bronze, silver and gold now. lol
They might as well erase the entire ladder system, and give X (x=number of premades in the queue) amount of Happy Cookies for the premade players if they win. 100 Happy Cookies can buy a Friendship Talisman in the shop. The more Friendship Talisman you share together with your buddy-buddies, the more IP you will get after games.
This is all that matters, after all. Having a jolly good time with your friends in this team based strategical-fighter game.
(ancient purist players won't get shit, this is not some anti-social game, and you should feel left out if you refuse to buddy-up, and you shall be reminded that you are nothing but a scum, a necessary wrong to fill up the game for bud-buddy-buddies.)
User was warned for this post (Lack of even an attempt to have a discussion)
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because playing solo doesn't interest them.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
Last picks can ban ---> improvement You can always get what you want ---> improvement Solo queue erased ---> a change
Now, this change is either welcomed or crucified, but it is NOT an improvement. Improvement means upgrading something to be better, faster, etc. 70 miles per hour is faster than 60 miles per hour, no one can argue that. Saying dynamic ranked (discounting the pick/ban improvements, as they should be treated seperately) can not be called an improvement (nor a step back, for that matter) over solo/duo queue.
Right now, they are taking measures to not only create problems for me out of nowhere, but to completely pull the rug under me. But it's fine, because RiotLyte said he knew in advance it will frustrate me. What a wizard, he is.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
Please explain how the differences here are a 'load of happy logistical horseshit.'
Damn, seeing how slick the new pick/ban phase look like just makes me even sadder.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
Behold and witness the 1% then.
But I like your style, trying to solve this discussion with numbers you pull out of nowhere, and basically saying nothing at all. To show you how empty your case is: - Your favorite champion gets removed. Entirely. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain. - A game mode (blind pick, dominion, ranked, ranked teams, teambuilder) gets removed. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain. - Some of your skins get removed (no fund, you already used them a lot) because RiotLyte says they are too ugly, and he knew it will upset you. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain. - Another champion gets removed. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain. - Your family gets removed. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain. - You get removed. So what? 99% you are wrong to complain.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
On November 04 2015 18:36 Numy wrote: Honestly I've been playing dota for so long that that just feels natural to me. The game is meant to be a group game not a solo one so it was always weird the primary method of play put emphasis on being solo.
DotA specifically disallows 4-man ranked. 1-3 and 5 are all allowed, but 4-man specifically cannot queue ranked because it's the most likely to end up as a shitshow.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
The funniest thing is, if they introduced voice chat, that would be one huuuge thing to argue against. It would suck here at EUNE, but in the US for example, I had to rethink my stance.
The ranking system would still needed to be seperate, but with a voice comm and a common language I could live with premade 3s and going up against a premade 5 as 2+3 once in a blue moon.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
The new system lets you cheat your way through to gold 1 with promotion helper though, that's sure to fix everything!
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
The new system lets you cheat your way through to gold 1 with promotion helper though, that's sure to fix everything!
It should've been a red flag that they are about to destroy ranked play. I swallowed the gutting of the ELO system, even though it is the best possible system out there and the most precise one. But all right, have divisions for the baddies, and promo games so that they can feel like pros. Whatever. But the demotion immunity and promotion helpers were the first real step towards self-destruction.
Meanwhile Diamond 5 is still a clusterfuck after what, 2 years? Though if the new changes come through, that problem will solve itself, because ranking will have no meaning to begin with.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
What's funny is that riot just addressed "promo anxiety" as a big issue and is adding the new promo change to deal with it and further fuck over ranked accuracy
In 2017 we're all going to start with gold accounts and you won't lose elo on a loss, calling it now
User was warned for this post (Useless sarcastic conjecture)
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
It's just my emphatically stated opinion. I'd be less matter of fact about it if there was less doom and gloom.
The whole "new feature vs improvement/change" thing is part of what makes most of what's been posted a noisy, empty debate. It's a red herring that honestly has nothing to do with anything except the battle lines people have drawn. What really matters are the concerns people have, Riot's awareness of those concerns, and Riot's ability/plan to address them.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
So basically we should keep calm and trust Riot, because you assured us that in the end everyone will be happy? Not saying it's not a possibility, but right now, especially after reading Riot "How Do I Still Have This Job" Lyte reply, I wouldn't be so sure.
On November 04 2015 23:36 Caiada wrote: I now love this change. The rhetoric is hilarious.
You already said you are a lonely anxious misanthrope, so it's not surprising you just find joy in others being mad as it somehow validates you. There's always a crazy one.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
What's funny is that riot just addressed "promo anxiety" as a big issue and is adding the new promo change to deal with it and further fuck over ranked accuracy
In 2017 we're all going to start with gold accounts and you won't lose elo on a loss, calling it now
Well soloq is a joke anyway so personally I don't give a shit about that too much. I expect game quality to drop even lower which is my problem with it.
The thing that I wonder is how will this matter for boosters. Cuz now when someone gets an order he might have to wait for others to get too cuz everyone is gonna be premade. Also people are probably just gonna start adding people and then doing the boosting a week later so you can just say "well I made a friend". Obviously this is for the more tryhard people who change ip and shit.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
What's funny is that riot just addressed "promo anxiety" as a big issue and is adding the new promo change to deal with it and further fuck over ranked accuracy
In 2017 we're all going to start with gold accounts and you won't lose elo on a loss, calling it now
We are also going to be assigned to random new friends we can play premade rankeds with, and there will be an option to reverse search for their facebook account, so we can totally hang out irl too. All this time I thought I wanted to play this game, but no guys, I actually just want to play with you!
User was warned for this post (Sarcastic hyperbole, drivel)
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
It's just my emphatically stated opinion. I'd be less matter of fact about it if there was less doom and gloom.
The whole "new feature vs improvement/change" thing is part of what makes most of what's been posted a noisy, empty debate. It's a red herring that honestly has nothing to do with anything except the battle lines people have drawn. What really matters are the concerns people have, Riot's awareness of those concerns, and Riot's ability/plan to address them.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
The way I see it they haven't said or done anything to preserve the integrity of the ranking system when this change goes through. This either means they either 1) didn't think about it, 2) don't care about it or 3) can't fix it. These options all don't seem very good to me.
On November 04 2015 23:13 Caiada wrote: Whenever something gets removed, people say, 'no, keep the old one, more options is always better' without realizing that is a load of happy logistical horseshit in 99% of cases.
The old elo system is much better than the current system though unless you have ladder anxiety or w/e
Also I hope by now you realize what a joke Lyte is. Division borders and 4man premades aren't toxic but sandbox mode and voicechat are. Sounds like a cheap excuse for being lazy. I'm surprised he didn't say a new league client would be toxic.
Then again, what other video game company hires a fuckin psychologist. Lyte is probably just a scapegoat in the big picture
If someone has ladder anxiety they need help from a psychologist (or to reach 10 years old) not the current system it is just as bad lol.
What's funny is that riot just addressed "promo anxiety" as a big issue and is adding the new promo change to deal with it and further fuck over ranked accuracy
In 2017 we're all going to start with gold accounts and you won't lose elo on a loss, calling it now
Well soloq is a joke anyway so personally I don't give a shit about that too much. I expect game quality to drop even lower which is my problem with it.
The thing that I wonder is how will this matter for boosters. Cuz now when someone gets an order he might have to wait for others to get too cuz everyone is gonna be premade. Also people are probably just gonna start adding people and then doing the boosting a week later so you can just say "well I made a friend". Obviously this is for the more tryhard people who change ip and shit.
It should be a lot more efficient for boosting if you work on an organized website and queue up with a bunch of other boosters. At lower elo's where the demand is high it shouldn't be too hard to coordinate that, but demand tapers off over diamond so it'll be harder to get premade boosting done at that level. More reason to hate diamond 5 players.
This also allows for "legal" boosting, where you have 4 smurfs carry 1 bad player and to my knowledge, the bad player shouldn't be banned, so there might be new demand from players who were previously afraid of getting banned from "illegal" boosting. I know several people who had no issue duoing with me on my smurf, but didn't want me to play on their account because they might get banned and lose all their skins. Of course, this boosting would probably be done not on smurfs but other accounts to be boosted, but you get the idea.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
So basically we should keep calm and trust Riot, because you assured us that in the end everyone will be happy? Not saying it's not a possibility, but right now, especially after reading Riot "How Do I Still Have This Job" Lyte reply, I wouldn't be so sure.
The question you need to ask yourself is what you're trying to accomplish by continuing to argue, particularly in such an aggressive/hyperbolic fashion, beyond the point where it's clear that we have differing opinions that are likely immutable. Are you:
Attempting to convince me I'm wrong?
Seeking to reach some form of mutual understanding?
Arguing for posterity?
Venting?
Killing time?
Trolling?
If it's option #1, then simply stating you disagree while making allusions to those things we see differently isn't likely to effect a change of opinion. You should talk instead about why those concerns of yours which Lyte mentioned are still concerns, bring up whichever concerns Lyte and/or Riot haven't mentioned, and perhaps add in what makes you believe Riot shouldn't be trusted to execute their plan/feature properly.
If it's option #2 you should identify whatever it is you think I don't understand and then proceed using a process much like that from option #1.
If it's option #3 then the hyperbole/doom and gloom is detrimental in the long run, though it's surely gratifying at the moment (i.e. option #4).
If it's option #5 then we're birds of a feather, though I'm probably going to execute the conversation shortly since I have work to do.
If it's option #6 you probably shouldn't admit to it because that will spoil everything.
On November 04 2015 23:57 Ketara wrote: This thread needs some mods in it, for serious.
Agree. It's bad enough that - seemingly - more people oppose the changes than agree with it, but the fact that they even voice it is just one step too much. With a few warnings, everyone should be convinced that season 6 ranked will be the best ranked experience out of any game throughout the history of gaming.
Imagine how this thread would look like if Lyte moderated it, haha.
- Looking good! - Can't wait! - Any1 looking for groups? We are a group of 3, welcoming anyone! - SWEET!!! - Riot outdid themselves, for real. - I dunno guys... [Warned] - Just what I wanted!
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
So basically we should keep calm and trust Riot, because you assured us that in the end everyone will be happy? Not saying it's not a possibility, but right now, especially after reading Riot "How Do I Still Have This Job" Lyte reply, I wouldn't be so sure.
The question you need to ask yourself is what you're trying to accomplish by continuing to argue, particularly in such an aggressive/hyperbolic fashion, beyond the point where it's clear that we have differing opinions that are likely immutable. Are you:
Attempting to convince me I'm wrong?
Seeking to reach some form of mutual understanding?
Arguing for posterity?
Venting?
Killing time?
Trolling?
If it's option #1, then simply stating you disagree while making allusions to those things we see differently isn't likely to effect a change of opinion. You should talk instead about why those concerns of yours which Lyte mentioned are still concerns, bring up whichever concerns Lyte and/or Riot haven't mentioned, and perhaps add in what makes you believe Riot shouldn't be trusted to execute their plan/feature properly.
If it's option #2 you should identify whatever it is you think I don't understand and then proceed using a process much like that from option #1.
If it's option #3 then the hyperbole/doom and gloom is detrimental in the long run, though it's surely gratifying at the moment (i.e. option #4).
If it's option #5 then we're birds of a feather, though I'm probably going to execute the conversation shortly since I have work to do.
If it's option #6 you probably shouldn't admit to it because that will spoil everything.
It shouldn't be hard for you to see how you have the same empty backup as I do in this question [will Riot make it good eventually?], but you act like it should be obvious you are right, so why not ask yourself if you are trolling. I am stating that the current changes will ruin ranked play as we know it. While it is an assumption, I can point fingers to change X and Y and say these will doom it. You, on the other hand, tell me/us to calm down, because Riot will fix it for sure. Because, you just know it. Not too deep now, is it?
The rest, is just coating, coloring (so at least there's some fun in these sad days to come). I don't try to oppress valid arguments, but don't expect me to give 100% serious replies to such fairy tales as "Riot will solve everything!". First, show me a Riot response which gives us hope to think that, then we can talk. Right now, all we have is Lyte saying he knew people like will be upset. I would not call that promising.
Edit: Though killing time is definitely a factor, because out of everyone who disagreed with me, Numy was the only one who brought up arguments worthwhile to respond to.
Edit2: all you are saying basically is "shhhhh guys, everything will fix itself!" [sorry for the many edits, I'm just too tired]
On November 05 2015 00:08 Volband wrote: Edit2: all you are saying basically is "shhhhh guys, everything will fix itself!" [sorry for the many edits, I'm just too tired]
I mean what that comes down to is faith in Riot based on past track record. Some people like the direction Riot has taken the game (I know Ketara and Seuss are both of the opinion that for the most part, systemic changes Riot has made to the game have always made the game better). Which is a perfectly reasonable opinion.
It's equally reasonable to have no faith in Riot because their vision for the game does not align with yours. But perhaps that means it's time to quit?
Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
On November 05 2015 00:17 Osmoses wrote: Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
Personally I'm not satisfied because these changes will make it so that your MMR will be even less an indication of your skill than before.
Since the beginning of duoq they've weighed duoers mmr together so that they're matched slightly higher. Premade or solo they should still be roughly in the right spot.
Back when there were more arguments about pick order, people were seriously telling me a 10-20 point difference in MMR is significant.
Much like the UI and support items and the Sion rework, I guarantee, once they stomp the dumb shit that pops up once the system is public, nobody but diehard grudge-holders will care.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
It's just my emphatically stated opinion. I'd be less matter of fact about it if there was less doom and gloom.
The whole "new feature vs improvement/change" thing is part of what makes most of what's been posted a noisy, empty debate. It's a red herring that honestly has nothing to do with anything except the battle lines people have drawn. What really matters are the concerns people have, Riot's awareness of those concerns, and Riot's ability/plan to address them.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
The way I see it they haven't said or done anything to preserve the integrity of the ranking system when this change goes through. This either means they either 1) didn't think about it, 2) don't care about it or 3) can't fix it. These options all don't seem very good to me.
On November 05 2015 00:17 Osmoses wrote: Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
Personally I'm not satisfied because these changes will make it so that your MMR will be even less an indication of your skill than before.
They haven't really talked much about the MMR side of things as far as I've seen. It's possible that Riot hasn't because most of the negative feedback consists of gut reactions/surface-level complaints, but I can't begrudge you for being very concerned about that aspect of the system. It's the part that's most likely to have issues.
I have some faith that those issues will be temporary, but that doesn't change the fact that some people will have negative experiences in the meantime.
Please start discussing this with seriousness and civility. Sarcastic drivel, useless complaining, and the refusal to respect an opinion other than your own will not be tolerated.
On November 04 2015 22:16 Caiada wrote: So go play SC2. LoL's a team game.
I don't even have friends to play with because I'm an anxious misanthrope. And you know what? I don't give a shit about this change. And if the matchmaking works at 99% of people's level, I'm going to give even less of a shit about it.
Quality comment after 5 seasons of solo queue's existence without much complaint towards the basis of the system. Not to mention that the ladder gives you rank for your SOLO performance in this team game.
Jesus, we are reaching /r/leagueoflegends level now.
You may feel that the system works, but Riot has clearly stated they have data and research that shows the experience could be improved not just for players already playing ranked, but for those who have stayed away because they don't want to/hate playing solo.
I'm all for Riot trying to improve LoL, even if they sometimes miss the mark. While there will almost certainly be bumps along the road, I don't think this will be one of those misses.
Bottom line is that they are introducing a new feature while completely erasing an old one. They create new fun experiences while shitting on old fun experiences. Just seperate them for God's sake and everyone's happy.
Bottom line is they're improving the old feature, and taking measures to address the problems you're complaining about. Riot is trying to preserve your fun experience while enabling new fun for everyone involved. There will probably be a few problems initially, but I think it's an achievable goal.
They aren't improving the old feature, they're replacing the old feature with a new feature and you can't just say it's an improvement, especially if you state it like a fact like you just did. You aren't the authority who decides whether something is an improvement or not.
Probably for most people under Diamond 4 or so it won't matter, but above that it will significantly affect both the accuracy of the rating system and the queue times.
It's just my emphatically stated opinion. I'd be less matter of fact about it if there was less doom and gloom.
The whole "new feature vs improvement/change" thing is part of what makes most of what's been posted a noisy, empty debate. It's a red herring that honestly has nothing to do with anything except the battle lines people have drawn. What really matters are the concerns people have, Riot's awareness of those concerns, and Riot's ability/plan to address them.
I think it's clear Riot is aware of and will address people's concerns. It seems that you and others either don't think Riot is aware of your concerns, or don't think Riot is capable of addressing them. That's fine, and we can disagree.
The way I see it they haven't said or done anything to preserve the integrity of the ranking system when this change goes through. This either means they either 1) didn't think about it, 2) don't care about it or 3) can't fix it. These options all don't seem very good to me.
On November 05 2015 00:17 Osmoses wrote: Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
Personally I'm not satisfied because these changes will make it so that your MMR will be even less an indication of your skill than before.
They haven't really talked much about the MMR side of things as far as I've seen. It's possible that Riot hasn't because most of the negative feedback consists of gut reactions/surface-level complaints, but I can't begrudge you for being very concerned about that aspect of the system. It's the part that's most likely to have issues.
I have some faith that those issues will be temporary, but that doesn't change the fact that some people will have negative experiences in the meantime.
Of course I also hope that these issues will be solved, but since I haven't heard Riot come up with a solution I remain unsatisfied with this change. I personally also can't think of anything that solves this problem other than different ladders (which they clearly don't want) nor have I heard anybody else with a solution that works within the proposed system.
Also having faith that these issues will be temporary doesn't really work for me.
On November 05 2015 00:17 Osmoses wrote: Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
Personally I'm not satisfied because these changes will make it so that your MMR will be even less an indication of your skill than before.
Could you explain? As I understand it groups will more or less have their own MMR independent of individual MMR (except perhaps for a new group or something, IDK). That seems reasonable to me, if you're in a group then, yes, your individual MMR doesn't matter, but your group's MMR does. Also, no one can see MMR so no one can even use it as an indicator. Unless you're saying that strong individual MMR is necessary Riot's matchmaking to be correct?
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
I think the promotion helper is pretty neat though, because it just helps smooth out variance that the stupid promotion system has in the first place -- if you lose promos and immediately get back in after a single game or winstreak then instead of a Bo3/5 you can think of it as a Bo5/7
However, they should then make it easier to drop leagues but slightly harder to drop divisions, because people really care about leagues + leagues are arbitrary + leagues have some reward so boosted animals should drop as much as possible, but divisions are just as arbitrary plus have no real incentive tied to it apart from being part of the silly ranking/grind system (like Hearthstone stars basically).
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
I think the promotion helper is pretty neat though, because it just helps smooth out variance that the stupid promotion system has in the first place -- if you lose promos and immediately get back in after a single game or winstreak then instead of a Bo3/5 you can think of it as a Bo5/7
However, they should then make it easier to drop leagues but slightly harder to drop divisions, because people really care about leagues + leagues are arbitrary + leagues have some reward so boosted animals should drop as much as possible, but divisions are just as arbitrary plus have no real incentive tied to it apart from being part of the silly ranking/grind system (like Hearthstone stars basically).
You don't climb with 50% win rate. The most important part of climbing with barely 50% win rate is what side you get since red side gives more lp and you lose less.
It might not be that accurate but can at least gives you a rough estimation. With new one it is gonna be literally useless.
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
They changed this in season 5. Now your MMR only has to be 1 division lower.
So gold 5 drops to silver 1 when their MMR hits silver 2. Gold 4 drops to gold 5 when their MMR hits gold 5.
On November 05 2015 00:17 Osmoses wrote: Why are you talking about this like it was a presidential election pertaining to the fate of the world or something? Calm down, it's just the matchmaking system of an online videogame.
Personally I always soloq, never duo. And I have no problems with any of this. I have no idea what you're even upset about. They're gonna weigh your report heavier if you're a solo among premades. They're gonna match teams of similar setups with each other. If you wanted to chat people up and be social then why are you even soloqing? In short, the hell are you mad about anyway?
Personally I'm not satisfied because these changes will make it so that your MMR will be even less an indication of your skill than before.
Could you explain? As I understand it groups will more or less have their own MMR independent of individual MMR (except perhaps for a new group or something, IDK). That seems reasonable to me, if you're in a group then, yes, your individual MMR doesn't matter, but your group's MMR does. Also, no one can see MMR so no one can even use it as an indicator. Unless you're saying that strong individual MMR is necessary Riot's matchmaking to be correct?
Yeah, I'm confused.
Well, say you have a group with 3 Masters players and one Diamond 4. Those 3 Masters players can easily carry the D4 guy into D1, while he certainly doesn't belong there.
Plus, having someone to tell you what to do artificially increases the skill level of said person. For example: the Masters players tell the D4 guy on TS how and when to move around the map. Now he's suddenly playing like a D2 player, but when he goes back to soloq he still plays like a D4 player while he might have gotten a lot higher up the ladder thanks to his teammates telling him what to do. This is inherently unfair to the people who only queue solo, since they don't have access to these artificial skill level boosts.
Why red side gives you more LP ? The only thing I knew is that red side has the higher average mmr team to somehow compensate blue side advantage, first time I hear that it also gives more LP, which does not make any sense if red side is the one with higher mmr
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
They changed this in season 5. Now your MMR only has to be 1 division lower.
So gold 5 drops to silver 1 when their MMR hits silver 2. Gold 4 drops to gold 5 when their MMR hits gold 5.
Is that true? The latest information I had was that you have to be Gold 5 to drop out of Platinum 5. I've seen Plat 5 players playing with exclusively Gold 4/3 while at 0 LP and losing multiple games in a row (does every single one of those Gold 4/3 people have Gold 1 MMR?) and not get demoted.
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
They changed this in season 5. Now your MMR only has to be 1 division lower.
So gold 5 drops to silver 1 when their MMR hits silver 2. Gold 4 drops to gold 5 when their MMR hits gold 5.
Is that true? The latest information I had was that you have to be Gold 5 to drop out of Platinum 5. I've seen Plat 5 players playing with exclusively Gold 4/3 while at 0 LP and losing multiple games in a row (does every single one of those Gold 4/3 people have Gold 1 MMR?) and not get demoted.
Yes its true.
I dropped out of diamond early in the season (had to get there again QQ!) and was surprised because I dropped when I was playing plat 1-2 players, sent a ticket to Riot just to ask what was up with that and they confirmed.
And then got flamed here when I posted what the Rioter told me :D
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
They changed this in season 5. Now your MMR only has to be 1 division lower.
So gold 5 drops to silver 1 when their MMR hits silver 2. Gold 4 drops to gold 5 when their MMR hits gold 5.
Is that true? The latest information I had was that you have to be Gold 5 to drop out of Platinum 5. I've seen Plat 5 players playing with exclusively Gold 4/3 while at 0 LP and losing multiple games in a row (does every single one of those Gold 4/3 people have Gold 1 MMR?) and not get demoted.
Yes its true.
I dropped out of diamond early in the season (had to get there again QQ!) and was surprised because I dropped when I was playing plat 1-2 players, sent a ticket to Riot just to ask what was up with that and they confirmed.
And then got flamed here when I posted what the Rioter told me :D
For Diamond my anecdotal evidence does support that, because it is pretty easy to drop out of Diamond 5, but (again, caveat anecdotal) it seems much harder to drop out of Plat 5. Maybe it's because in the mid Gold-low Plat range the MMR is really compressed whereas the distribution things out toward the higher ends (based on Sufficiency's data it seems the 5th division of every league is especially fat as well)
I would personally like to see them make promotions and demotions both easier across all divisions. I don't like how in the current system it's possible and even probable that a Plat 1 100 LP player has higher MMR than a D5 0 LP player.
But that's a pretty tangential and inappropriate conversation for the thread.
It sounds like they're making promotions easier at least for lower leagues, and that's cool because it removes a lot of the anxiety and rage that the system can cause. But I feel like if they don't also make demotions easier it can lead to inflation. It's possible they are making demotions easier too and not mentioning it. Riot does shit like that.
On November 04 2015 22:33 nafta wrote: Also you guys overrate communication so much. Unless you are actually good it really doesn't matter at all. It is like the common mistake of people thinking them duoing and being friends makes them better than the average 2 competent players at same mmr.
So taking that line of thought, you shouldn't care if you're the solo in the premade 4s game?
no the opposite because solo q rating is going to be meaningless. That means when the system tries to balance it out your diamond 5 could actually be a gold 4.
Not even gonna start on the whole boosting thing since it is very common anyway.
SoloQ rating is already pretty meaningless given that you don't drop leagues until your MMR is a full league lower, which means like Hearthstone's star-streak system even if you average 50% you should eventually just slowly climb up.
They changed this in season 5. Now your MMR only has to be 1 division lower.
So gold 5 drops to silver 1 when their MMR hits silver 2. Gold 4 drops to gold 5 when their MMR hits gold 5.
Is that true? The latest information I had was that you have to be Gold 5 to drop out of Platinum 5. I've seen Plat 5 players playing with exclusively Gold 4/3 while at 0 LP and losing multiple games in a row (does every single one of those Gold 4/3 people have Gold 1 MMR?) and not get demoted.
Yes its true.
I dropped out of diamond early in the season (had to get there again QQ!) and was surprised because I dropped when I was playing plat 1-2 players, sent a ticket to Riot just to ask what was up with that and they confirmed.
And then got flamed here when I posted what the Rioter told me :D
For Diamond my anecdotal evidence does support that, because it is pretty easy to drop out of Diamond 5, but (again, caveat anecdotal) it seems much harder to drop out of Plat 5. Maybe it's because in the mid Gold-low Plat range the MMR is really compressed whereas the distribution things out toward the higher ends (based on Sufficiency's data it seems the 5th division of every league is especially fat as well)
They put it in patch notes in the beginning of this season/preseason so I'm pretty sure it's true.
On November 05 2015 02:15 Ketara wrote: I would personally like to see them make promotions and demotions both easier across all divisions. I don't like how in the current system it's possible and even probable that a Plat 1 100 LP player has higher MMR than a D5 0 LP player.
But that's a pretty tangential and inappropriate conversation for the thread.
It sounds like they're making promotions easier at least for lower leagues, and that's cool because it removes a lot of the anxiety and rage that the system can cause. But I feel like if they don't also make demotions easier it can lead to inflation. It's possible they are making demotions easier too and not mentioning it. Riot does shit like that.
It's going to be really silly at low elos though
I can imagine 4/5man premade surrendering every game to derank quickly and proceed to stomp low bronze kids. It should be like silver 1 in CSGO which is filled with derankers in addition to the absolute worst players
I would be willing to guess that it's possible to detect that kind of behavior and ban it.
Not that I'm saying it won't happen. But I think it won't be the problem you think it is.
In any case, Lyte said in that post that 4 man queues in normals tend to be more toxic than they'd like, and they're going to monitor those especially carefully.
The more I think about the multi stacked queues thing the more I like it. Yes there will probably be a non zero advantage to queueing with a group. But it might be very small, and having more groups in ranked might be fun and make ranked a less toxic experience for everyone.
On November 05 2015 02:33 Ketara wrote: I would be willing to guess that it's possible to detect that kind of behavior and ban it.
Not that I'm saying it won't happen. But I think it won't be the problem you think it is.
In any case, Lyte said in that post that 4 man queues in normals tend to be more toxic than they'd like, and they're going to monitor those especially carefully.
The more I think about the multi stacked queues thing the more I like it. Yes there will probably be a non zero advantage to queueing with a group. But it might be very small, and having more groups in ranked might be fun and make ranked a less toxic experience for everyone.
Oh yeah there's no argument that this will be great for people who have friends who play this game; the only people getting shafted are solo q players who refuse to group up.
Also in terms of detection, you'd think it'd be easy to detect deranking, but there are variables that can be used to mask it. Also, if riot can't solve disco nunu without outright removing clarity/cv...
I'm not sure 4-mans will be as toxic as you think, even if Doctor Lyte, Riot Ph.D mentions that they're more toxic than the baseline.
I've played a lot of solo normal queues and there have been a lot of times where I was sort of sure that I was with a 4-man but it was hard to tell because the game played basically like normal.
I've also played a lot of 4-man stacks and we always invite the 5th to Discord and are generally positive playing with the guy.
In addition, as long as Plenty Of People Are Playing The Game, there shouldn't really be a noticeable affect in how you do ranked games because in the bulk of the playerbase area the queue groups should match up pretty easily eliminating any persistent biases in how they adjust for elo inflation.
Its not necessarily that 4-stacks are more toxic on average, its that any particularly toxic 4-stack has more power to ruin the play experience for the 5th player than any other possible combination of stacks/solo players.
4-man stacks put the odd guy in a very weird position. From my experience back in Dota, most of the 4 stacks had this weird "us vs. you" mentality in which the odd guy out either had to be their bitch, or would get flamed and repawted to no ends.
I'm pretty sure 4-mans are significantly more frustrating/toxic, but we're probably comparing something like 10% instead of 5%, so it's still going to be low overall. Just like the number lyte has, where the duoqs that are nice never show up cause they just play the game and you never know.
The changes makes a ton of sense on the whole having fun and teamgame aspect, but they do kinda make it harder for rank to be about skill.
Then again, your ability to find and work with people can also be considered a skill, and at the end of the day winning is what really matters right? Its interesting to think about what soloq is really measuring now. I guess we can call it ranked queue instead of soloq. Its not going to measure you 'solo' abilities as much anymore. The more I type about it the more it makes sense that they would try to measure more of your team skill rather than your pure solo skill.
I guess I rather have a more arbitrary team system that measures teams better than a tighter solo system that measures something that shouldn't apply as much.
On November 05 2015 03:01 Kaneh wrote: Its interesting to think about what soloq is really measuring now. I guess we can call it ranked queue instead of soloq. Its not going to measure you 'solo' abilities as much anymore.
I feel like Riot is trying to make solo queue some kind of "jack-of-all-trades" situation, in which you have fun, measure your skill, and work with other people at the same time.
Sadly, this world is not perfect, and trying to make a system good at everything tends to end in a system that is good at nothing. Riot seems to have a severe case of Reality Distortion Field.
From my vast experience on the other side of the coin the biggest problem for the single player in this situation is a lot of MIAs or general map awareness thoughts end up being said on skype, and this guy is playing in the dark. It's not malicious it's just convinient. Same thing goes for re engages or dragon contesting or tower trades.
I actually think it lends a lot of creedence to the people saying making these changes w/o voice chat is silly. Even if you aren't toxic (which obviously I think I'm not LOL) that person gets buttfucked by your skype call.
On November 05 2015 02:49 Zess wrote: I'm not sure 4-mans will be as toxic as you think, even if Doctor Lyte, Riot Ph.D mentions that they're more toxic than the baseline.
I've played a lot of solo normal queues and there have been a lot of times where I was sort of sure that I was with a 4-man but it was hard to tell because the game played basically like normal.
I've also played a lot of 4-man stacks and we always invite the 5th to Discord and are generally positive playing with the guy.
In addition, as long as Plenty Of People Are Playing The Game, there shouldn't really be a noticeable affect in how you do ranked games because in the bulk of the playerbase area the queue groups should match up pretty easily eliminating any persistent biases in how they adjust for elo inflation.
IMO, implementing multi-player queue without ingame voice chat is a Manchurian candidate for exposing more toxicity on the part of Riot. Its really the most plausible explanation because they routinely never allow for changes that may have the slightest risk of increasing expectations (aka potential legitimate criticisms to levy on teammates) of players towards others, and now they implement a system that massively increases scrutiny on one or two players in a game? Highly suspect.
On November 05 2015 03:01 Kaneh wrote: Its interesting to think about what soloq is really measuring now. I guess we can call it ranked queue instead of soloq. Its not going to measure you 'solo' abilities as much anymore.
I feel like Riot is trying to make solo queue some kind of "jack-of-all-trades" situation, in which you have fun, measure your skill, and work with other people at the same time.
Sadly, this world is not perfect, and trying to make a system good at everything tends to end in a system that is good at nothing. Riot seems to have a severe case of Reality Distortion Field.
I think they're not making a system good at everything. They very clearly aren't making a good system for solo players. They are clearly making it worse, lyte even admits as much that the problems are marginally worse for 3 and noticeably worse with 4.
Its more is the tradeoff of 'solo' worth the gain in 'team'. Riot thinks their data and tests show that is it, and honestly I trust them on this. At the very least they're trying to improve something that admittedly worked but wasn't perfect, and that's a good direction worthy of support, even if there are some failures along the way.
Never liked the idea of in-client voice chat; the problems are obvious. It'll be mandatory and people will bitch at you if you decide hey I'll listen to some music or have a chill game of LoL without randos yelling. It's different in CS:GO because it's much quicker and much much much less casual.
They need something optional you can invite people to in champ select. Like Curse Voice but supported.
In-game voice chat would have to cover PvP.net as well to really work. Most premade groups are going to want to talk to each other before/after/between games, and they'll use Skype/Mumble/whatever to do it if you don't provide them the means yourself.
On November 05 2015 03:40 Caiada wrote: Never liked the idea of in-client voice chat; the problems are obvious. It'll be mandatory and people will bitch at you if you decide hey I'll listen to some music or have a chill game of LoL without randos yelling. It's different in CS:GO because it's much quicker and much much much less casual.
So what about DotA, where in-client voice works just fine and is widely used but also not mandatory?
Imagine if we went back in time one week, and you said: "Riot's going to announce team builder draft, a brand new champ select, fixing promo series, fixing high-MMR matchmaking, a way to get FREE SKINS, and a BRAND NEW CLIENT".
And it turned out that the community didn't give one shit about all of that and instead preferred to bitch about a scenario (4 friends of equal rank queuing up for ranked together, and then you getting queued into that group, and then that group deciding to be toxic towards you after they all get their preferred role/champ) that maybe happens less than 5% of the time.
Sometimes I wonder about the psychological toll of working for a year to make all these huge improvements, only to get massively shit on for some small stupid inconsequential thing. It's like a pussy-whipped guy spending five hours making Valentine's Day dinner for his girlfriend only to get screamed at because he used the wrong silverware or something.
It won't matter at all because as stated, the people shafted by the changes mentioned here are a minority. People who'd gush all over "free skins" even if it was -EV or something, or barely brought anything, but just for the idea of it? There are plenty of these, ensuring Riot positive feedback (positive as in favourable, not "good").
Same with how when you're somewhat decent at the game, but not a pro, you're often getting shafted by the balance decisions and soloQ because a lot of the players don't touch ranked at all (or past their placements), and amongst those who do over half are Silver or Bronze.
That's a vocal minority, one that kinda regularly gets shat on, but still a minority.
I think the point is that this is why I can't take any of you complainers seriously. When trinkets came out, the experts told us they didn't need to hear any more - they knew it would just ruin the game. If dynamic queues weren't announced yesterday, you'd be complaining that the drop rates for keys will probably be set really low and we aren't going to be getting enough free skins. (See, e.g., Alaric talking about how free skins are somehow going to be negative EV.) And one day, when replays are announced, the ensuing thread will be mostly complaining and whining about something totally inconsequential.
And it's the same people who just repeatedly post over and over again. It's the boy who cried Kindred: if you complain about literally anything and everything, nonstop, any legitimate criticism is just lost in a sea of bitching. It makes looking for any interesting discussion (how will the new champ select change solo queue? are we going to have better pick/ban phases if bans are distributed? are priority picks really that important in solo queue? did assist gold overly encourage teamfight comps, and will it lead to a change in the meta?) pointless because we'd all rather shit on Riot.
(Still better than /r/hearthstone or /r/starcraft though.)
On November 05 2015 03:40 Caiada wrote: Never liked the idea of in-client voice chat; the problems are obvious. It'll be mandatory and people will bitch at you if you decide hey I'll listen to some music or have a chill game of LoL without randos yelling. It's different in CS:GO because it's much quicker and much much much less casual.
So what about DotA, where in-client voice works just fine and is widely used but also not mandatory?
DotA is also a much more self-selecting pool of players though.
On November 05 2015 04:48 GrandInquisitor wrote: I think the point is that this is why I can't take any of you complainers seriously. When trinkets came out, the experts told us they didn't need to hear any more - they knew it would just ruin the game. If dynamic queues weren't announced yesterday, you'd be complaining that the drop rates for keys will probably be set really low and we aren't going to be getting enough free skins. (See, e.g., Alaric talking about how free skins are somehow going to be negative EV.) And one day, when replays are announced, the ensuing thread will be mostly complaining and whining about something totally inconsequential.
And it's the same people who just repeatedly post over and over again. It's the boy who cried Kindred: if you complain about literally anything and everything, nonstop, any legitimate criticism is just lost in a sea of bitching. It makes looking for any interesting discussion (how will the new champ select change solo queue? are we going to have better pick/ban phases if bans are distributed? are priority picks really that important in solo queue? did assist gold overly encourage teamfight comps, and will it lead to a change in the meta?) pointless because we'd all rather shit on Riot.
(Still better than /r/hearthstone or /r/starcraft though.)
Well don't worry with condescending posts like that people don't take you seriously either. You could try to start those conversations if you think they are important or matter.
I'm confused by what you are saying. Although, perhaps that is also because I am confused that people think team builder is a positive. The rest seem like cosmetic changes (which TL people are historically uninterested in) and a weird change of position on toxicity (or an exception to Riot's obsession with it), without addressing the best way to fix that situation (voice chat).
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
Well no. Because matchmaking can't do its job with queue segregation/selection. And because it's impossible to be matched with people playing alone if 4 mans exist. This is like the age old problem of surveys claiming that straight men and straight women have different number of average sexual partners. It's mathematically impossible for those numbers to be different unless straight guys are boning a lot of other guys more than the straight women are sexing other women. Except in this case we don't even have a sliver of pretense to suggest that things can not add up.
Suppose that player 1 on team a plays to platinum in "ranked solo 5 man". Then he goes and plays ranked solo "proper". He is ranked as a platinum player but every game he has played has been in a seperate queue and there is no way to know how correct that it is when he stops playing his 5 and starts playing his 1.
In a sense it means that both MMRs are incorrect the more he plays in both queues. (Given that there is a difference).
The irony here is that as the density of 5/4 man games increase the worse the queue segregation becomes while simulateously increasing the liklihood of getting the 4.
IE the system only works if very few people queue 3+ And those that do queue primarily solo and not in groups.
The same problem actually occurs with duos too but it's not quite as prominent.
I get the reason they want to do it. They want to encourage people to play in groups because social interaction -> retention (plus more skin buys and other reinforcing things). By merging the queues they think people are more likely to play in groups. IE they think that ranked teams doesn't have enough people and is too formally locked*.
I am just not sure that the solution is a particularly good one. If you have no queue selection bias then you just have a straight advantage in 5 manning. If you do then the MMR system breaks down for players who spend significant amounts of time in 5 mans.
*which is probably true, especially with ranked team MMR resetting with every new team
On November 05 2015 04:59 cLutZ wrote: I'm confused by what you are saying. Although, perhaps that is also because I am confused that people think team builder is a positive. The rest seem like cosmetic changes (which TL people are historically uninterested in) and a weird change of position on toxicity (or an exception to Riot's obsession with it), without addressing the best way to fix that situation (voice chat).
Edit @ GI
You're confused that it's a good thing Riot is getting rid of arguments over who gets to go mid?
I see a lot of games decided by the fact that one side queued up with a plat-level top, jg, mid, adc, and supp, whereas the other side queued up with three plat-level mids and two plat-level adc's (and ends up with two roles filled at plat-level and three roles at silver or gold-level, and that's where the rage starts). Team Builder fixes that issue.
Sure, it's kind of discarding the concept of measuring your all-around five-role skill. But that was kind of already not what solo queue rank was measuring anyway. Ideally you could imagine ranks for each of the five different roles measured separately. Until that happens (and I doubt it will), this seems like an acceptable cost to let people play the role they want.
On November 05 2015 04:59 cLutZ wrote: I'm confused by what you are saying. Although, perhaps that is also because I am confused that people think team builder is a positive. The rest seem like cosmetic changes (which TL people are historically uninterested in) and a weird change of position on toxicity (or an exception to Riot's obsession with it), without addressing the best way to fix that situation (voice chat).
Edit @ GI
You're confused that it's a good thing Riot is getting rid of arguments over who gets to go mid?
I see a lot of games decided by the fact that one side queued up with a plat-level top, jg, mid, adc, and supp, whereas the other side queued up with three plat-level mids and two plat-level adc's (and ends up with two roles filled at plat-level and three roles at silver or gold-level, and that's where the rage starts). Team Builder fixes that issue.
Sure, it's kind of discarding the concept of measuring your all-around five-role skill. But that was kind of already not what solo queue rank was measuring anyway. Ideally you could imagine ranks for each of the five different roles measured separately. Until that happens (and I doubt it will), this seems like an acceptable cost to let people play the role they want.
Well, I just always preferred the solution of pick order>all, and banning people who call positions (10-20x worse than swearing to me), and also I generally like the grab bag nature of pick order, also I do prefer the ideal of ELO approximately being a weighted average of your skills at all roles.
Also, I don't think its smart to combine it with a rework of a major role (adc) while reworks of many top lane champions are also ongoing. In the end it will probably be fine, and the game will still be good enough to be worth playing, particularly considering its exciting pro scene (Korean LOL is still the best esports experience out there by quite a large margin). However, I do think its a lot of things that are more likely to push me towards a pure spectator over a player/spectator. On the other hand, if they merely implement the graphic changes + voice chat that would have reinvigorated me quite a bit.
I mean, that's kind of my point earlier about people complaining. You're essentially saying you're threatening to quit playing because people get to play their preferred role in ranked. That's such a bizarre thought process that either I can't credit any of your other beliefs, because you and I are obviously incredibly different people, or you're just being hyperbolic/dramatic and don't actually plan on quitting over something that seems so clearly good for the game.
As someone that likes to think of himself as an all-around player, I fully agree that it's a shame that MMR won't represent your all-around ability any more. But if I were being honest with myself, I'd have to admit that that's just wishful thinking, and my solo queue rank is hugely dependent on the fact that I have only needed to play mid/ADC in 2.88% of my games this season.
If we don't get separate ranks for each role, I'd at least like to see a role breakdown next to the player's rank; at least the most-played role and what % of the time you play that role.
On November 05 2015 03:40 Caiada wrote: Never liked the idea of in-client voice chat; the problems are obvious. It'll be mandatory and people will bitch at you if you decide hey I'll listen to some music or have a chill game of LoL without randos yelling. It's different in CS:GO because it's much quicker and much much much less casual.
So what about DotA, where in-client voice works just fine and is widely used but also not mandatory?
Voice chat is one of my least favorite things about DotA. I've only played 300 odd games (non ranked) but I can count the number of good experiences (people communicating about the game without being assholes) on one finger. The vast vast majority of the time it's either random chatter, someone raging at his shit team, someone with a horrible mic or speaking in another language. Not in the slightest big interested in reading any of that stuff let alone listening to it.
On November 05 2015 06:19 GrandInquisitor wrote: I mean, that's kind of my point earlier about people complaining. You're essentially saying you're threatening to quit playing because people get to play their preferred role in ranked. That's such a bizarre thought process that either I can't credit any of your other beliefs, because you and I are obviously incredibly different people, or you're just being hyperbolic/dramatic and don't actually plan on quitting over something that seems so clearly good for the game.
As someone that likes to think of himself as an all-around player, I fully agree that it's a shame that MMR won't represent your all-around ability any more. But if I were being honest with myself, I'd have to admit that that's just wishful thinking, and my solo queue rank is hugely dependent on the fact that I have only needed to play mid/ADC in 2.88% of my games this season.
If we don't get separate ranks for each role, I'd at least like to see a role breakdown next to the player's rank; at least the most-played role and what % of the time you play that role.
What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Honestly, this change is almost entirely positive. The only down side is if you want to "break the meta" it can be more difficult since lanes/roles are more set in stone, but even then you can discuss with your team after you get in game.
On November 05 2015 06:19 GrandInquisitor wrote: I mean, that's kind of my point earlier about people complaining. You're essentially saying you're threatening to quit playing because people get to play their preferred role in ranked. That's such a bizarre thought process that either I can't credit any of your other beliefs, because you and I are obviously incredibly different people, or you're just being hyperbolic/dramatic and don't actually plan on quitting over something that seems so clearly good for the game.
As someone that likes to think of himself as an all-around player, I fully agree that it's a shame that MMR won't represent your all-around ability any more. But if I were being honest with myself, I'd have to admit that that's just wishful thinking, and my solo queue rank is hugely dependent on the fact that I have only needed to play mid/ADC in 2.88% of my games this season.
If we don't get separate ranks for each role, I'd at least like to see a role breakdown next to the player's rank; at least the most-played role and what % of the time you play that role.
What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Honestly, this change is almost entirely positive. The only down side is if you want to "break the meta" it can be more difficult since lanes/roles are more set in stone, but even then you can discuss with your team after you get in game.
I'd personally prefer a system where you can select for each role whether you want to play it or not, so you can select top, jungle, adc for example, but this is still decent.
On November 05 2015 07:08 Ryuu314 wrote: What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Because if dungeon finder in wow has taught us anything, fill=support
If it was literally 20% chance at each role I'd be so down but that's just not how these things end up working. I personally like the changes but the roulette wheel is gone for when you are down for whatever (much less of a problem then when you want to play something specific or nothing at all which happens too)
On November 05 2015 07:08 Ryuu314 wrote: What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Because if dungeon finder in wow has taught us anything, fill=support
If it was literally 20% chance at each role I'd be so down but that's just not how these things end up working. I personally like the changes but the roulette wheel is gone for when you are down for whatever (much less of a problem then when you want to play something specific or nothing at all which happens too)
They should bring back free week champions in ranked along with hard random lock-ins
On November 05 2015 06:19 GrandInquisitor wrote: I mean, that's kind of my point earlier about people complaining. You're essentially saying you're threatening to quit playing because people get to play their preferred role in ranked. That's such a bizarre thought process that either I can't credit any of your other beliefs, because you and I are obviously incredibly different people, or you're just being hyperbolic/dramatic and don't actually plan on quitting over something that seems so clearly good for the game.
As someone that likes to think of himself as an all-around player, I fully agree that it's a shame that MMR won't represent your all-around ability any more. But if I were being honest with myself, I'd have to admit that that's just wishful thinking, and my solo queue rank is hugely dependent on the fact that I have only needed to play mid/ADC in 2.88% of my games this season.
If we don't get separate ranks for each role, I'd at least like to see a role breakdown next to the player's rank; at least the most-played role and what % of the time you play that role.
What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Well, the point is that before, if you only literally only played mid, you're at a major disadvantage when someone else gets mid. But if you were well-rounded, theoretically you're at an advantage because your teammates are more likely to be at their best roles. This new system allow you to just queue as mid only, and be Bronze-level at all other roles but reach Diamond playing just mid. That would have been much more difficult before - hence why it's "punishing" good all-around players, since their well-roundedness only helps them get faster queues.
On November 04 2015 20:24 Frolossus wrote: if you play alone you get matched with people playing alone. if you want to play with friends this system is more inclusive and therefore better, provided that matchmaking does it's job.
Well no. Because matchmaking can't do its job with queue segregation/selection. And because it's impossible to be matched with people playing alone if 4 mans exist. This is like the age old problem of surveys claiming that straight men and straight women have different number of average sexual partners. It's mathematically impossible for those numbers to be different unless straight guys are boning a lot of other guys more than the straight women are sexing other women. Except in this case we don't even have a sliver of pretense to suggest that things can not add up.
Aren't you assuming here that the number of men and women (or solo-queues and 4-man queues to keep it ontopic) are equal? For example, if there are 10 1-queues and 10 4-queues, it's impossible to be matched with 1-queues if you're a 1-queue yourself. But if there are 40 1-queues and 10 4 queues, there are in total 8 games, where 30/40 of the people soloqueuing have a game with only soloqueue people. (compare this to a situation where there is only 1 man and 10 women. Assuming all women have sex with the man, the average number of people the man had sex with is 10, while the average number of people the women had sex with is 1. 10!=1.)
My guess would be that riot assumed queue properties of normals for futures ranked. Also, using this logic we need to take into account that there is waiting time. It's possible to give 4-queues less priority during matchmaking to try to influence queue ratios by making 4-queues have longer queue times. I'm not saying they do or should do this, but it's a possible matchmaking parameter.
Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your post completely. (that happens to me more often..)
On November 05 2015 07:08 Ryuu314 wrote: What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Because if dungeon finder in wow has taught us anything, fill=support
If it was literally 20% chance at each role I'd be so down but that's just not how these things end up working. I personally like the changes but the roulette wheel is gone for when you are down for whatever (much less of a problem then when you want to play something specific or nothing at all which happens too)
Yeah, I think it will be just a support position. That being said, will help queue times that way. Not the end of the world.
On November 05 2015 06:19 GrandInquisitor wrote: I mean, that's kind of my point earlier about people complaining. You're essentially saying you're threatening to quit playing because people get to play their preferred role in ranked. That's such a bizarre thought process that either I can't credit any of your other beliefs, because you and I are obviously incredibly different people, or you're just being hyperbolic/dramatic and don't actually plan on quitting over something that seems so clearly good for the game.
As someone that likes to think of himself as an all-around player, I fully agree that it's a shame that MMR won't represent your all-around ability any more. But if I were being honest with myself, I'd have to admit that that's just wishful thinking, and my solo queue rank is hugely dependent on the fact that I have only needed to play mid/ADC in 2.88% of my games this season.
If we don't get separate ranks for each role, I'd at least like to see a role breakdown next to the player's rank; at least the most-played role and what % of the time you play that role.
What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Honestly, this change is almost entirely positive. The only down side is if you want to "break the meta" it can be more difficult since lanes/roles are more set in stone, but even then you can discuss with your team after you get in game.
Really, what you do with that is just reward people who are perfectly happy to sit in queue for mid for 20 minutes. Personally the whole champ select problem is Riot's own creation because they failed to prioritize policing people who don't obey pick order over in game swearing.
On November 05 2015 08:17 Yorbon wrote: Aren't you assuming here that the number of men and women (or solo-queues and 4-man queues to keep it ontopic) are equal? For example, if there are 10 1-queues and 10 4-queues, it's impossible to be matched with 1-queues if you're a 1-queue yourself. But if there are 40 1-queues and 10 4 queues, there are in total 8 games, where 30/40 of the people soloqueuing have a game with only soloqueue people. (compare this to a situation where there is only 1 man and 10 women. Assuming all women have sex with the man, the average number of people the man had sex with is 10, while the average number of people the women had sex with is 1. 10!=1.)
My guess would be that riot assumed queue properties of normals for futures ranked. Also, using this logic we need to take into account that there is waiting time. It's possible to give 4-queues less priority during matchmaking to try to influence queue ratios by making 4-queues have longer queue times. I'm not saying they do or should do this, but it's a possible matchmaking parameter.
Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your post completely. (that happens to me more often..)
For men and women yes (the actual population difference is not nearly enough to fix the discrepency. In the US its 1.07 Men to 1 Woman for 15-65 year olds so men will have on average 1.07 times the number of average partners women have. Since the number is "Sum partners/population" and "sum partners" has to be the same). Surveys come back with like 6 and 4 for numbers.
The same thing happens in soloqueue. The total number of people on a team is 5. So if a 4 man queues then a solo must exist in that slot. The total number of solo's in the slots will be the total number of 4 mans queuing. So if 10% of the people queue is 4 mans,(and no 5 or 3's or 2s exist) and 4 mans always get paired with 4 mans then an average solo person would expect to play about 2.7% of their games in 4 mans.[Basically for every 80 players, 72 would be solo, 8 would be 4 mans, so 2/72 would be chosen for the 4 man queue game and 70 would be chosen for the pure solo games]
That doesn't seem like a lot but then figure 5's and 3's and 2's which can't play with 4's. And potentially much higher than 10% of the player base queuing as 4. Say its 20% each in terms of total numbers.
Then you would have about a 25% chance of getting queue'd with a 4 man if you queued up solo.
And you simply can't get around this unless no one queues for 4 mans(or 3 mans or duos etc).
The simpler way to say no would have been "you run into duo queues in solo queue right? well then you're going to run into 4's."
On November 05 2015 07:08 Ryuu314 wrote: What I don't understand is that Riot even gave people the option to truly be an all-around player...that's what the "fill" option is for...
Because if dungeon finder in wow has taught us anything, fill=support
If it was literally 20% chance at each role I'd be so down but that's just not how these things end up working. I personally like the changes but the roulette wheel is gone for when you are down for whatever (much less of a problem then when you want to play something specific or nothing at all which happens too)
With the possibility of joining 3+ premades I actually think support will be a lot more contested, as is premades are already largely adc/support.
I can't really understand the drama with dynamic Q, good players will be good solo and in groups, trolls and bad players will be bad in solo and groups, can't see anything change significantly, outside of the fact that when you want you can play with more friends, which is mostly a good alternative IMO
3) We've upgraded the Report System to completely wipe out the power of Premade 4 reports ganging up on a player, and given the solo player "equal power" reports in this scenario.
Nice and simple, solves my biggest concern with 4mans.
On November 05 2015 23:24 Ansibled wrote: Maybe I'm weird here but I don't really care, at all, about who gets reported or not after the game... I care if the game itself is fun.
Yes you are weird, you know it's standard to go "reported xDDD" and use all chat to make sure the other team knows you are reporting the 0/2 zed
Real talk though, it's fun to feed super hard while deranking, get someone to rage at you, then see the "a player you reported has been punished, thanks for making league better" message.
As for most other people who enjoy reporting, it's because they rage when losing and need an outlet, that outlet usually being the report button; why do you think people still say "report for unskilled" after they get wrecked? Lyte even said somewhere the chronic reporters tend to be toxic.
User was warned for this post (flaunting intentional feeding to be edgy)
Yeah, the whole anecdote Lyte uses here is pointless.
What kind of player gets in a Game with Lyte and isn't on his absolutely best behavior? I think his 4800 games as a solo player don't really compare to the mean experience. Maybe that's just me though.
Depends on whether he was playing as "RiotLyte" or "Lyte" or incognito. Even if it was as Lyte I'd imagine most players wouldn't make the connection because most players don't even read patch notes, let alone dev posts.
On November 06 2015 01:18 Seuss wrote: Depends on whether he was playing as "RiotLyte" or "Lyte" or incognito. Even if it was as Lyte I'd imagine most players wouldn't make the connection because most players don't even read patch notes, let alone dev posts.
Yeah, I guess. He probably plays on an anonymous smurf.
I have lulzy visions of flames realizing they just torched the head of player behavior. That would be a reaction video I'd love to watch.
Dynamic queues were one of the worse aspect of the hero of the storm ladder. It was so painfully bad that Blizzard back-pedalled (something they rarely do) and accepted the fact that solo/duo ala LoL was the best way to go.
How ironic that now LoL tries to do what Blizzard failed.
By the way it seems Riot is copying more and more things from HotS, between out of game hero levels, dynamic queues, bonus xp(ip) for playing with friends, increasing the death timers in long games etc. They're pretty much taking all the good things from hots l0l. Now they just need to copy the map pool thing and start creating new maps !
Riot have been making maps longer than HotS has been around though. If you mean rotating map pool then I disagree, that's not something the game needs. You can't balance the game around maps like HotS since HotS has far fewer parameters going on that changing one that big doesn't break everything else like it does in League/dota.
I mean I can install hots if I want to play hots I'd rather they stop making the game more like it. (the global bounty system reminds me of the global xp/no item system which killed my interest in hots)
On November 06 2015 03:24 RouaF wrote: Dynamic queues were one of the worse aspect of the hero of the storm ladder. It was so painfully bad that Blizzard back-pedalled (something they rarely do) and accepted the fact that solo/duo ala LoL was the best way to go.
How ironic that now LoL tries to do what Blizzard failed.
By the way it seems Riot is copying more and more things from HotS, between out of game hero levels, dynamic queues, bonus xp(ip) for playing with friends, increasing the death timers in long games etc. They're pretty much taking all the good things from hots l0l. Now they just need to copy the map pool thing and start creating new maps !
Queues will always work better in lol because of increased player count. But we will see.
I think that weird mechanics like global bounties are par for the course for Riot. When Riot's wanted to nudge the game one way or another they've added weirder and often more invisible mechanics in the past. Stuff like adding catchup XP for junglers who are behind, fiddling with XP for duo lanes, making tower take less damage early game, assist streak gold, and probably five other things I'm forgetting that people don't notice while they're playing. I think it's obvious this is another one of Riot's nudge mechanics rather than a conscious attempt to remove gold, items, and xp differences from the game.
On November 06 2015 05:52 TheYango wrote: I mean, removing assist streaks means the combined bounty change is both a net decrease in complexity and increase in transparency.
Also shows a complete 180 in design philosophy from last season where they removed global tower gold so one snowballing lane didn't also snowball other lanes..
Ironically this change actually has a greater effect there. If I rememeber the numbers right, a tower gave 125 global gold? Now ending a killing spree grants 190 global goal. The assassin in your top lane now hurts your lane by winning his lane, because inevitably he will get ganked.
I think it will be annoying to fall behind if some random on your team lost a kill streak across the map. It also probably won't accomplish its goal of making it worth it to gank the fed opponent because it doesn't solve the problem of you instantly losing if they countergank.
well they way it works now, you are worth a lot of gold, but you are also really strong so it's risky to try to kill you. Now you are just a guy with a kill streak that isn't all that strong, compound that with the fact that getting killed no longer fully resets your kill streak, and getting a lot of kills on to one hero is actually super bad for your team.
I really hate this direction, it's blatant rubber banding masquerading as team play
If I understood it right, in the new champion select you are going to show what champ you want to pick before the bans, meaning that if people who ban don't like it for some reason they may troll you and ban it. Do you think it will be safer to show different champ than the one you want to play and then switch (if its possible)?
On November 06 2015 19:45 M2 wrote: If I understood it right, in the new champion select you are going to show what champ you want to pick before the bans, meaning that if people who ban don't like it for some reason they may troll you and ban it. Do you think it will be safer to show different champ than the one you want to play and then switch (if its possible)?
It's more like "Hey, this is what I want to pick." and people can change things depending on teamcomp.
On November 06 2015 05:52 TheYango wrote: I mean, removing assist streaks means the combined bounty change is both a net decrease in complexity and increase in transparency.
Also shows a complete 180 in design philosophy from last season where they removed global tower gold so one snowballing lane didn't also snowball other lanes..
Ironically this change actually has a greater effect there. If I rememeber the numbers right, a tower gave 125 global gold? Now ending a killing spree grants 190 global goal. The assassin in your top lane now hurts your lane by winning his lane, because inevitably he will get ganked.
You're ahed if you kill the enemy turret first, probably, hence the "snowball." If you end someone's kill streak, they had to get that streak to begin with so you're probably behind. I'm not a fan of making it global but catching up != snowballing.
And if the assassin winning his lane top TPs to your lane when you get ganked and get you a double kill because he's ahead, he doesn't lose you your lane.
On November 06 2015 05:52 TheYango wrote: I mean, removing assist streaks means the combined bounty change is both a net decrease in complexity and increase in transparency.
Also shows a complete 180 in design philosophy from last season where they removed global tower gold so one snowballing lane didn't also snowball other lanes..
Ironically this change actually has a greater effect there. If I rememeber the numbers right, a tower gave 125 global gold? Now ending a killing spree grants 190 global goal. The assassin in your top lane now hurts your lane by winning his lane, because inevitably he will get ganked.
You're ahed if you kill the enemy turret first, probably, hence the "snowball." If you end someone's kill streak, they had to get that streak to begin with so you're probably behind. I'm not a fan of making it global but catching up != snowballing.
And if the assassin winning his lane top TPs to your lane when you get ganked and get you a double kill because he's ahead, he doesn't lose you your lane.
yea except even if he kills his lane dude twice he's only up 140g, if you have to expend summoners for a kill in the lane phase it's basically not worth it, why put a bounty on your head for 100g? The kill streak bounty system doesn't actually make any sense when combined with the global bounty system, I would like for it to be heavily nerfed or removed completely. If I have a net worth of 1k+ over my opponent and you manage to kill me 500g seems reasonable, when I have an advantage of ~200g why is there a 500g bounty on my head? by splitting the gold with my team I'm not being given the tools with which to defend the bounty.
This is exacerbated; by the fact that they have introduced kill streak bounty decay(not fully reseting your bounty on death). Making acquiring a kill streak extremely risky to your team.
On November 06 2015 05:52 TheYango wrote: I mean, removing assist streaks means the combined bounty change is both a net decrease in complexity and increase in transparency.
Also shows a complete 180 in design philosophy from last season where they removed global tower gold so one snowballing lane didn't also snowball other lanes..
Ironically this change actually has a greater effect there. If I rememeber the numbers right, a tower gave 125 global gold? Now ending a killing spree grants 190 global goal. The assassin in your top lane now hurts your lane by winning his lane, because inevitably he will get ganked.
You're ahed if you kill the enemy turret first, probably, hence the "snowball." If you end someone's kill streak, they had to get that streak to begin with so you're probably behind. I'm not a fan of making it global but catching up != snowballing.
And if the assassin winning his lane top TPs to your lane when you get ganked and get you a double kill because he's ahead, he doesn't lose you your lane.
yea except even if he kills his lane dude twice he's only up 140g, if you have to expend summoners for a kill in the lane phase it's basically not worth it, why put a bounty on your head for 100g? The kill streak bounty system doesn't actually make any sense when combined with the global bounty system, I would like for it to be heavily nerfed or removed completely. If I have a net worth of 1k+ over my opponent and you manage to kill me 500g seems reasonable, when I have an advantage of ~200g why is there a 500g bounty on my head? by splitting the gold with my team I'm not being given the tools with which to defend the bounty.
This is exacerbated; by the fact that they have introduced kill streak bounty decay(not fully reseting your bounty on death). Making acquiring a kill streak extremely risky to your team.
A kill is worth 300g. I don't know how you can only be 140g ahead if you get 2 kills.
You'll have to tell me how you view it, because your bounty goes up when you get kills, eg. when you get ~250 gold per kill (averaged over a few), not ~100.
Only the bonus for your killing spree is global. So you get first blood (400) + kill (300) = you have 700 gold. You now have a tier 2 bounty which means if you die, you give out 30 global gold. The global gold is for the shutdown, not for getting kills.
Yeah dude the change actually means if you're up 2 kills and your lane opponent gets a shutdown, he gets less gold than he did before and doesn't close the gap as much.
His teammates get some gold though.
Which is reasonable because much of the time if you're legendary or whatever it will take 2-3 people to kill you.
Before moving on, I’d just like to highlight how freeing the new exclusivity changes are, design wise. Under the old system, if we put a bunch of powerful stuff deep in the offense tree, you would just take it all. Because of this, power on any individual mastery had to be tuned low and 21 pointers had to be pretty generalized - we were basically balancing for Kayle. No longer! With the addition of exclusivity between masteries in the same tier, we can finally make things speak to specific classes of a champion, instead of “has a pulse and a basic attack.”
So then after taking a look at the tree some of you may be thinking, “WTF MAN I PLAY AP JINX AND CLEARLY THE ONLY THING WORTH TAKING FOR ME HERE IS MASTERY X. MASTERIES DON’T MATTER! WHERE ARE MY MEANINGFUL CHOICES!?” Well... to be honest, that’s not the primary goal here. What we want is for every champion to feel like there’s a mastery path for them. More specifically, we’re hoping to draw out and amplify some of the cool things your champion’s kit does, instead of just loading on general power.
As an example, while Janna may appreciate +10% AP, she’s going to feel much more excited about a +10% amp to shields and heals. One of these stats is for almost everyone, but the other speaks to a number of specific supports. Choice in the system is a secondary goal that, while nice to have, is not as important. There’s 126 champions out there and limited space in the tree, so we’d prefer a world where Soraka and Brand both have 1 path that speaks to them, instead of Brand getting 2 and Soraka crying in the corner. That said, giving players meaningful choices is still an important goal, so we’re trying to add it into the trees where we can. We just may not be able to do it for EVERY champion. Also looking at it in other places this preseason, like the item system.
WoW realized a while ago that a bunch of small 'choices' add up to a bunch of useless lip service when you aggregate them. I'm glad LoL thought of some way to make them more interesting. They're getting a lot better at specificity.
Now I just hope Riot guts the boring rune system at some point too.
Before moving on, I’d just like to highlight how freeing the new exclusivity changes are, design wise. Under the old system, if we put a bunch of powerful stuff deep in the offense tree, you would just take it all. Because of this, power on any individual mastery had to be tuned low and 21 pointers had to be pretty generalized - we were basically balancing for Kayle. No longer! With the addition of exclusivity between masteries in the same tier, we can finally make things speak to specific classes of a champion, instead of “has a pulse and a basic attack.”
So then after taking a look at the tree some of you may be thinking, “WTF MAN I PLAY AP JINX AND CLEARLY THE ONLY THING WORTH TAKING FOR ME HERE IS MASTERY X. MASTERIES DON’T MATTER! WHERE ARE MY MEANINGFUL CHOICES!?” Well... to be honest, that’s not the primary goal here. What we want is for every champion to feel like there’s a mastery path for them. More specifically, we’re hoping to draw out and amplify some of the cool things your champion’s kit does, instead of just loading on general power.
As an example, while Janna may appreciate +10% AP, she’s going to feel much more excited about a +10% amp to shields and heals. One of these stats is for almost everyone, but the other speaks to a number of specific supports. Choice in the system is a secondary goal that, while nice to have, is not as important. There’s 126 champions out there and limited space in the tree, so we’d prefer a world where Soraka and Brand both have 1 path that speaks to them, instead of Brand getting 2 and Soraka crying in the corner. That said, giving players meaningful choices is still an important goal, so we’re trying to add it into the trees where we can. We just may not be able to do it for EVERY champion. Also looking at it in other places this preseason, like the item system.
Most interesting part of that for me is them saying that they left room for more masteries and would like people to make suggestions on things that are missing for them to add.
Would be fun to go through champions and try to find playstyles that none of the current mastery offers fit.
Before moving on, I’d just like to highlight how freeing the new exclusivity changes are, design wise. Under the old system, if we put a bunch of powerful stuff deep in the offense tree, you would just take it all. Because of this, power on any individual mastery had to be tuned low and 21 pointers had to be pretty generalized - we were basically balancing for Kayle. No longer! With the addition of exclusivity between masteries in the same tier, we can finally make things speak to specific classes of a champion, instead of “has a pulse and a basic attack.”
So then after taking a look at the tree some of you may be thinking, “WTF MAN I PLAY AP JINX AND CLEARLY THE ONLY THING WORTH TAKING FOR ME HERE IS MASTERY X. MASTERIES DON’T MATTER! WHERE ARE MY MEANINGFUL CHOICES!?” Well... to be honest, that’s not the primary goal here. What we want is for every champion to feel like there’s a mastery path for them. More specifically, we’re hoping to draw out and amplify some of the cool things your champion’s kit does, instead of just loading on general power.
As an example, while Janna may appreciate +10% AP, she’s going to feel much more excited about a +10% amp to shields and heals. One of these stats is for almost everyone, but the other speaks to a number of specific supports. Choice in the system is a secondary goal that, while nice to have, is not as important. There’s 126 champions out there and limited space in the tree, so we’d prefer a world where Soraka and Brand both have 1 path that speaks to them, instead of Brand getting 2 and Soraka crying in the corner. That said, giving players meaningful choices is still an important goal, so we’re trying to add it into the trees where we can. We just may not be able to do it for EVERY champion. Also looking at it in other places this preseason, like the item system.
...
If they are purposely just making one path the best, why even have the masteries in the first place? Just buff every champion a little bit, or remove them entirely and dont worry about replacing them.
Lolwtf. Like why over complicate it if you dont want each player to make a choice? Get rid of them and then adjust champions base stats / minion stats / jungle stats accordingly. I honestly dont think it would make any difference if they totally removed Masteries. They are just adding unneccesary complexity and adding noob traps if they meet their design goals.
I feel the same about runes, tbh. That being said, I've been playing for years and recognize the huge advantage having 18 runepages gives me over the average player. I aint even mad.
Still nothing promising about dynamic queues. Let's hope they just don't want to announce big changes during Blizzcon.
As for the new masteries, I initially welcomed them. I still think the runic masteries are great, though for 99% of the champions, it's no-brainer to which runic mastery to pick. I am, however, very very disappointed how they treated regular masteries. The idea of having tiers and having to decide between them is great, really. They only forgot one thing: MEANINGFUL CHOICES. Every tier should have double amount of masteries, so masteries can (not saying will) defy playstyles. I tried to make two test masteries for Janna and Leona. Both of them were painfully obvious, and every single choice was "do I wanna be stupid or efficent?". What's the point then?
I like the current masteries much more, because you can actually pull off some weird shit, which matters in the early game.
I also do not understand why they made the utility tree possibly a viable route for damage dealers, while if you are a tank or support, none of the offensive masteries are worth taking. Unless you are Rengar support or sth, but you know what I mean.
The teleport change is good, though I'd even increase the time you actually arrive to the target location. It should be around the same for tp-ing on a turret, because I believe with the non-reduceable cooldown on TP, and the immense weakness in top lane vs ignite/exhaust opponents (which indirectly means you have a much weaker mini-baron control) should make up for it that you can at least help your bot lane if they are dived.
So then after taking a look at the tree some of you may be thinking, “WTF MAN I PLAY AP JINX AND CLEARLY THE ONLY THING WORTH TAKING FOR ME HERE IS MASTERY X. MASTERIES DON’T MATTER! WHERE ARE MY MEANINGFUL CHOICES!?” Well... to be honest, that’s not the primary goal here. What we want is for every champion to feel like there’s a mastery path for them. More specifically, we’re hoping to draw out and amplify some of the cool things your champion’s kit does, instead of just loading on general power.
Just feels pointless. If you just want to give every champion a buff, just give your champion a buff... Its not like you player-base physically WANTS to jump through the hoop of filling out masteries where you don't even want them to make a choice. Its like having to go to block buster to rent a movie... no one wants that shit, so as soon it was available without having to Blockbuster just went out of business. If there was a few choices that were all potentially good (I actually like the current ones for this, change em all the time based on matchup / teamcomps), it is pretty sweet because the player gets a customization point.
Right now we dont have a customization point, just a hoop we have to jump through. Like going through customs at the end of your vacation.
On November 05 2015 18:32 M2 wrote: I can't really understand the drama with dynamic Q, good players will be good solo and in groups, trolls and bad players will be bad in solo and groups, can't see anything change significantly, outside of the fact that when you want you can play with more friends, which is mostly a good alternative IMO
That statement is rather stretching it. I mean, it's true, but you just can't shrink a huge problem into some absolutes like this.
3) We've upgraded the Report System to completely wipe out the power of Premade 4 reports ganging up on a player, and given the solo player "equal power" reports in this scenario.
Nice and simple, solves my biggest concern with 4mans.
Knowing how premade 4 games can turn into a "who holds hostage who now?" shitfest certainly did not make me any more hopeful, lol.
Been at reddit at least a week ago. Not that anyone would need it, because it requires no brain-power whatsoever. Even the runic masteries are painfully obvious, which is sad, because it would be fun if let's say when I pick a tank, I really have 3 meaningful choices among the 3 defensive runic masteries.
Actually think there's some real choices in the keystone masteries. They're not just different numbers but look like they actually will play out differently. There'll still be an accepted 'best' but that unavoidable.. I kind of like the changes.
On November 08 2015 00:24 Kaethis wrote: Actually think there's some real choices in the keystone masteries. They're not just different numbers but look like they actually will play out differently. There'll still be an accepted 'best' but that unavoidable.. I kind of like the changes.
I don't know the last one had more choices so I feel like you could vary things up a little bit whereas the new system looks like everything will follow exactly the same path.
This page is, mathematically, the tankiest you can possibly be. The 9 points in offense are mathematically the greatest increases to Rammus's clear.
There are two theoretically possible changes you could make to this page:
#1 - Change Tenacious for 1 point in Perserverence, vs. an enemy team that does not have much in terms of crowd control. Teams that have little to no crowd control are theoretically possible, but in real games they basically do not exist.
#2 - Change Hardiness+Reinforced Armor to Resistance+Evasive. This would only be viable against a team that is all magic damage and has no ADC, because Reinforced Armor is so much better than Evasive mathematically. Teams with 5 APs and no ADCs are theoretically possible, but in real games they basically do not exist.
There's two key things that I'm stating in the analysis of this mastery page.
#1 - The masteries that give you the best damage / best tankiness is based on MATH. It is not debatable. There is no room for choice. We sat down and used math to figure out what was literally the best.
#2 - The room for variation is only there for games vs. team comps that are so rare as to not actually be useful variation.
As such, you can use this same mastery page for Rammus in every game ever, without thinking about it.
So, first I want to talk about Keystone masteries.
The difference between Grasp of the Undying and Strength of the Ages I think is poor. This is somewhere where I think the new masteries could be improved upon.
Both of these masteries essentially do the same thing: They make you tankier by giving you more health. Based on what champion you are, one of them will be better than the other. Which one is better for Rammus? We don't know without doing some math on that. So while there is a technical choice, it is not necessarily a meaningful choice. One of them is going to be the best.
This is a criticism of the new system, and a fair one. However, as shown above, it's the same in the older system, where we would just use math to figure out what is the best.
However, Bond of Stone does something different than just make you tankier. It also makes your allies tankier.
In fact, Bond of Stone is likely to make you take more damage than you would otherwise, because even though you're getting damage reduction, allies who aren't as tanky as you will be sharing damage with you. But they will be taking less damage.
It's not hard to extrapolate this and think that hey, maybe my team comp has a diver who isn't going to be as tanky as me, but there's value in keeping them alive, such as an Irelia or a Fiora or something like that. In that case, maybe Bond of Stone is a good choice. Rammus is going to dive with Fiora, but the enemy team is likely going to burst Fiora, and a mastery that keeps Fiora alive longer is stronger than a mastery that keeps Rammus alive longer.
However, at the same time, maybe you're in a team comp where Rammus will be diving by himself. Maybe your other diver is actually going to be tankier than you, like a Malphite or a Sion or a Mundo or whatever. In that case, maybe Bond of Stone is not the best choice.
Or maybe it's based on preference and how selfish you want to be.
So even just with the keystone masteries there is some amount of potential variation. It's not great because two of the three are very similar, but there is a choice there and just in this one slot there's more choice than in the entirety of the previous mastery system.
However, there's also choices elsewhere in the tree, because they've been made exclusive. You can't just get all the best stuff.
For example:
Insight vs. Perserverence both masteries are good, but do totally different things, and can be more based on playstyle and preference. It's very easy to argue that increased summoner spell cooldown is just not very useful in real scenarios. It's also very easy to argue that it's extremely useful. It's not clear cut and it's not based on what is mathematically better.
Swiftness vs. Legendary Guardian can easily be based on how much CC is on the enemy team. This is similar to the look at Tenacious vs. Perserverence. However, it is much more pronounced here.
In season 5 you're looking at: 10% Tenacity vs. 0.35% missing health regen.
In season 6 you're looking at: 15% Tenacity vs. 10 Armor + 10 MR.
In season 5, the 1 point in Perserverence is so awful that it's really not much of a choice. The only reason you don't take Tenacious is if there is just no CC at all on the enemy team. But in season 6, Legendary Guardian, while not jaw drop amazing, is actually pretty good. So it's actually worth it to decide for yourself well, the enemy team has some CC, but really not all that much, I can get away with Legendary Guardian. Or maybe well, the enemy team has so many big slows that I really need Tenacious.
But the thing is this is not something that's clear and obvious (unless the team is a unicorn and has zero CC). It's based on preference. It's based on your intuition as a player of how much crowd control you'll be running into.
And as such it is straight up better than the previous system.
Now, there are some other choices that are false choices that I don't like as much, at least for Rammus.
Explorer vs. Tough Skin I think Tough Skin is pretty obviously better. Especially if Tough Skin works after resistances. If it works before resistances then Explorer is pretty obviously better, unless you need Tough Skin for early jungle clears. So this tier isn't so great.
Wanderer vs. Savagery for Rammus is just going to be whichever one clears faster, that can be done with math.
Secret Stash vs. Runic Affinity isn't a good choice for Rammus because Rammus needs Gromp buff so much that Runic Affinity becomes very high value.
Fury vs. Sorcery Fury is clearly better for clearing for Rammus, and as a jungler masteries that are better for clearing are going to be default higher value. The same goes for Double Edged Sword vs. Feast.
This is also all based on a defense oriented mastery page. If you wanted to go 21/9 on Rammus, we could make an 18/0/12 page that's also offense based. There's more choice there as well, mostly surrounding on if you want to do more single target damage or more AOE damage vs. the enemy team.
So, in conclusion, while the new mastery system could be better and isn't perfect, compared to the old one it is a big improvement for Rammus. We do have options now that are based on player preference and the individual game, whereas in the season 5 system if you deviated from this mastery page Scip posted, we could actually prove you mathematically incorrect.
New masteries are better than the old masteries Volband. Sorru.
Kalista, Kennen, Kindred, Ezreal are unlikely to build crit/IE, Corki probably won't build IE early (and crits aren't a big part of his damage until super late game), and against champions such as Graves or Caitlyn, if the AoE on the enemy team (Ryze, Azir, Ziggs, etc.) is high enough, I'll still skip the crit-reducing mastery in favour of the AoE one.
Of course if you just dismiss all these cases by saying they never happen you can remove choices.
On November 08 2015 01:42 Alaric wrote: Kalista, Kennen, Kindred, Ezreal are unlikely to build crit/IE, Corki probably won't build IE early (and crits aren't a big part of his damage until super late game), and against champions such as Graves or Caitlyn, if the AoE on the enemy team (Ryze, Azir, Ziggs, etc.) is high enough, I'll still skip the crit-reducing mastery in favour of the AoE one.
Of course if you just dismiss all these cases by saying they never happen you can remove choices.
And you would be mathematically wrong to do so, and we can prove that to you .
Esp on Rammus, who gets AD from Armor woo!
Besides, even if there were more of a case for Resistance than I advertised, there would still be more choice in the new mastery system. And it would be based on preference instead of being based on what is provably better.
On November 08 2015 01:42 Alaric wrote: Kalista, Kennen, Kindred, Ezreal are unlikely to build crit/IE, Corki probably won't build IE early (and crits aren't a big part of his damage until super late game), and against champions such as Graves or Caitlyn, if the AoE on the enemy team (Ryze, Azir, Ziggs, etc.) is high enough, I'll still skip the crit-reducing mastery in favour of the AoE one.
Of course if you just dismiss all these cases by saying they never happen you can remove choices.
And you would be mathematically wrong to do so, and we can prove that to you.
Esp on Rammus, who gets AD from Armor woo!
Besides, even if there were more of a case for Resistance than I advertised, there would still be more choice in the new mastery system. And it would be based on preference instead of being based on what is provably better.
I really wonder how you could prove that. Like, even if you go through with the numbers, what would be the plan?
On November 08 2015 01:42 Alaric wrote: Kalista, Kennen, Kindred, Ezreal are unlikely to build crit/IE, Corki probably won't build IE early (and crits aren't a big part of his damage until super late game), and against champions such as Graves or Caitlyn, if the AoE on the enemy team (Ryze, Azir, Ziggs, etc.) is high enough, I'll still skip the crit-reducing mastery in favour of the AoE one.
Of course if you just dismiss all these cases by saying they never happen you can remove choices.
And you would be mathematically wrong to do so, and we can prove that to you .
Esp on Rammus, who gets AD from Armor woo!
Besides, even if there were more of a case for Resistance than I advertised, there would still be more choice in the new mastery system. And it would be based on preference instead of being based on what is provably better.
Rammus gets AD from armour, not from one point in the mastery that reduces crit damage, you're warping things again (and talking about 1.25 AD).
You would look at an enemy team comp, look at what it's calculatable damage output would be, and then pick which masteries reduce that amount the most.
So while its a choice, its not really a choice. One is better than the other.
Not all of the choices in all mastery slots are real choices for every champion, but I'm arguing that at least for the majority of champions the number of real choices will improve in the new system.
Merciless and dangerous game don't boost your clear speed.
They also do different things. Dangerous game doesn't increase your damage. It makes you tankier. While you can compare merciless to double edged sword, and on average double edged sword is a higher damage increase than merciless (especially for an initiator), dangerous game does something that's just different.
Since Rammus has a slow clear speed and no mana issues, we went for ASPD and double edged sword since these things boost his clear. For a different champion I think there would be a lot more competition, as the attack speed is not useful for very much else.
It's not clear cut though.
Because it's a better system
As to the new masteries giving less stats in total, that's entirely possible. But it has nothing to do with the efficacy of the system.
On November 08 2015 07:25 Ketara wrote: Merciless and dangerous game don't boost your clear speed.
They also do different things. Dangerous game doesn't increase your damage. It makes you tankier. While you can compare merciless to double edged sword, and on average double edged sword is a higher damage increase than merciless (especially for an initiator), dangerous game does something that's just different.
Since Rammus has a slow clear speed and no mana issues, we went for ASPD and double edged sword since these things boost his clear. For a different champion I think there would be a lot more competition, as the attack speed is not useful for very much else.
It's not clear cut though.
Because it's a better system
As to the new masteries giving less stats in total, that's entirely possible. But it has nothing to do with the efficacy of the system.
Just a note, not taking an sides, when 100-0ing somebody, Merciless is a ~2% damage boost.
Yes. And double edged sword is a 3% damage increase that works on jungle camps.
You can't just do it that way though. Since Rammus is an initiator a majority of his damage (although not much of a majority since Rammus sustained damage is pretty good compared to his burst) will happen before the target hits 40% HP.
One thing I'd like to see out of the defense tree in the new system is a defensive keystone that increases your damage, for champions that want to have a healthy mix of tanky and damage stats like bruisers.
If I had a pbe account I would totally make that suggestion to Rita.
Most interesting thing about these updates as an outsider is the change to champion select to be mini-team builder, especially if it extends to ranked. It's the stake through the withered and long-dead possibility that they don't desire a specific lane setup in every game and an open declaration that they want the game to be 1/1/2 forever.
I'm pretty curious how well it will work out. It definitely has an advantage of squeezing out small competitors if it does, since I don't think any other MOBA has the player base to be able to do that and still have decent matchmaking.
On November 08 2015 07:57 Ketara wrote: Yes. And double edged sword is a 3% damage increase that works on jungle camps.
You can't just do it that way though. Since Rammus is an initiator a majority of his damage (although not much of a majority since Rammus sustained damage is pretty good compared to his burst) will happen before the target hits 40% HP.
One thing I'd like to see out of the defense tree in the new system is a defensive keystone that increases your damage, for champions that want to have a healthy mix of tanky and damage stats like bruisers.
If I had a pbe account I would totally make that suggestion to Rita.
Honestly, the variances you are describing are so miniscule I don't see a compelling reason for keeping masteries in the game. If they were going to rework them it needed to be to a wow-style system where each tree significantly alters the way you play a character and within the tree its about mostly cosmetic changes inside that overall choice.
Hm, Let's see Leona. First of all, you want a resolve keystone, so you are going to invest all the way there, while the ferocity tree gives you exactly nothing, so the remaining points have to be assigned to cunning.
5 points to unyielding should be a no-brainer, and not just because it has a synergy with her W (and her future build), but because the health regen is useless. You bought only wards and potions to begin with early game, when such a life regen could matter, and now you can't even buy wards and start with more money, Also, you will most likely still start with targon, so the health regen is just useless. Same goes for Thresh and Braum.
So, Explorer or Tough Skin. Against ranged opponents at bot lane, it really isn't a question, Tough skin just gets you to reach lvl2/3 (whenever you want to start going ham) all the more safely, and after that, none of these two masteries are crucial in lane, though having tough skin still sounds much better, because your opponents will have to be close to your E range, and if not, it means you are zoning them out. Explorer can be fun, if you want to gank mid early, but you'll have mobility boots most of the time and rather fast, so you give up lane strength (inb4 someone tries to argue that some +12 movement speed in brush shenanigans will win bot lane more reliably, than tough skin) just to have a narrow window of opportunity when you can roam more efficently to mid lane. Meh. Whether explorer is better later in the game if you don't plan on buying some speedy boots... It's just too weird.
Runic armor vs Veteran scars is, once again, an easy one. Unless you are supporting an AP Janna of course, because then suddenly we are presented with some meaningful choices, but I'm going to be bold and assume that you will still see marksmen on your side at botlane, so veteran scars is just superior. Yeah, runic armor can be comboed with the whooping 2 hp/5sec of Recovery in the first tier, so if you want to waste 10 points to have an extra ~2.3 life regen instead the scaling bonus resistance and scaling hp masteries, go ahead. (Yes, the regen is scaling as well, but when mid/late game fights will occur, no one will wait for you to regen anything, you either explode or not)
Now if we add Preservance to the picture, we actually have to accept the fact that you can have some preeeetty nice life regen. Then we wake up and take the 15% reduced summoner cooldowns, because more often than not, reduced flash, ignite/exhaust cooldown will net you more kills and saves, than (gonna make up a number now) +~7 life regen/5. And again, Insight has a nice mid and late game power as well.
The 4th tier where I actually had to take on my imaginary glasses, because 15% tenacity is just good, can't argue with that. Legendary Guardian should still be the g-to choice, as you can start your cc chain a million miles away, and your basic role is to get into the fray and endure the beatings. Though even if you are having one of those games, where you have to stick to your adc/apc, because that 20/0/0 Rengar is hunting them, Swiftness still won't top it. Also, Legendary Guardian means +4/4 resistances constantly at bot lane. But this is the one tier where I could see people taking swiftness once in a blue moon, though I won't agree with them. It's still not a meaningful choice, it's just sad to leave Tenacity behind.
And the playstyle defining keystones, all right, that's what we've been waiting for. Forget basic masteries, they are just to fill the void. Here we come, 3 different Leonas at least just from the resolve tree!! Grasp of Undying: This looks charming, I know you are already counting that 3% of ~3500 as damage sounds cool. It does, actually. Sadly, we don't start with ~3500hp, and while it hurts a bit during the laning phase too, Leona a.) never had problems with lacking early damage b.) landing your skills and cc is how you win the lane, an extra ~50 on hit damage is just luxury. Take ignite if you want a higher kill potential. Sadly, as fun as it could become later in the game, your job will still be to cc the living crap out of everyone and to start (or occasionally disengage) fights. The enemy carries won't die because you hit them in the face for ~200 dmg (after resistances), but because you put them on a plate for your assassins, or your tanky top laner, who actually benefits from this mastery, because unlike you, he has no other obligations other than "be an annoying asshole". Also, it would be hardly playstyle defining for you, because you auto-attack during the off-time anyway, and your build has been HP heavy too, so nothing would really change. Strength of the ages: No. I mean, it's good, but how on Earth could you pick this over Bond of Stone: Easiest keystone choice in my entire life. Percent based damage reduction which doesn't suffer from max/current hp damage and works vs. everything (ie. minions, dragon)?! This bonus is doubled when I'm near an ally and I happen to be on a lane with an ally 99% of the tme (damn you afkers!!)??! They also happen to be squishy, and this kestone mastery lets me take away from the damage he would receive, while I'm tanky as fuck since the very beginning??! .... Naaah, which one was the hp based bonus damage keystone mastery again? Totally want that instead.
I guess a good point could be raised, that while BoS just makes everything else a laughing matter, the liferegen masteries are actually a good combination with this one. Which is true. If I could pick all the masteries in one tree, I would definitely invest everything in this tree, because as I just said, BoS+liferegen sounds so damn neat during the early game! But I can't do that, and I'm still forced to choose. The only difference after knowing I'll pick BoS in the end is that I'm not choosing between useless and very good, but good and very good. A prime example why the new way of picking masteries, or rather, the options presented are pitiful. If you pick health regen nstead of a 15% reduction of one of the ost powerful skills (flash+ignite/exhaust) in the game which are accessible since lvl1, than you are probably the person who is happy, that now you won't look at your silver border at the loading screen, but your silver division 3 border instead.
Anyway, we have 12 useless points to spend, so let's get over with it:
Wanderer (5) - (won't change my opinion on Explorer, especially because BoS will probably make you hurt more during the laning phase, so you'll need Toughness even more so) Secret Stash - was it a hard choice? honestly? Tier 3 - The one example where Riot hit the nail in the head. Both of these are so damn useless, that it's not really obvious what you should take. I guess if you are one of those people who can even run out of mana with Leona, than pick Meditation, otherwise Merciless sounds like the way to go. Which is terrible to type out, because it's still a ridiculously ineffective mastery for you. Tier 4 - All right, on a serious note, this is the one and only tier where you can really choose between somewhat meaningful options. As much as I like Bandit, Dangerous Game have its' uses on an all-in support like Leona. Credits where it's due, I guess?
I really don't see how is this an interactive or gamestyle defining mastery system.
Don't want to make another WoT, so a quick rundown on Janna's no-brainer choices: Wanderer Secret Stash Meditation Bandit Intelligence Windspeaker's Blessing (once again, hardest choice in my life)
Recovery Toughness (I can already see people picking Explorer for that Janna brush-control) Runic Armor Insight
Damn. We can even switch Janna out with Nami and we get the same results.You'll need some math for Soraka to know whether you Preservance on her instead of Insight, I guess. Imo it's an easy Preservance, as flash is rather meh on Raka, and her second summoner spell is only secondary to the power of her constant heals.
On November 08 2015 13:03 Volband wrote: Hm, Let's see Leona. First of all, you want a resolve keystone, so you are going to invest all the way there, while the ferocity tree gives you exactly nothing, so the remaining points have to be assigned to cunning.
5 points to unyielding should be a no-brainer, and not just because it has a synergy with her W (and her future build), but because the health regen is useless. You bought only wards and potions to begin with early game, when such a life regen could matter, and now you can't even buy wards and start with more money, Also, you will most likely still start with targon, so the health regen is just useless. Same goes for Thresh and Braum.
So, Explorer or Tough Skin. Against ranged opponents at bot lane, it really isn't a question, Tough skin just gets you to reach lvl2/3 (whenever you want to start going ham) all the more safely, and after that, none of these two masteries are crucial in lane, though having tough skin still sounds much better, because your opponents will have to be close to your E range, and if not, it means you are zoning them out. Explorer can be fun, if you want to gank mid early, but you'll have mobility boots most of the time and rather fast, so you give up lane strength (inb4 someone tries to argue that some +12 movement speed in brush shenanigans will win bot lane more reliably, than tough skin) just to have a narrow window of opportunity when you can roam more efficently to mid lane. Meh. Whether explorer is better later in the game if you don't plan on buying some speedy boots... It's just too weird.
Runic armor vs Veteran scars is, once again, an easy one. Unless you are supporting an AP Janna of course, because then suddenly we are presented with some meaningful choices, but I'm going to be bold and assume that you will still see marksmen on your side at botlane, so veteran scars is just superior. Yeah, runic armor can be comboed with the whooping 2 hp/5sec of Recovery in the first tier, so if you want to waste 10 points to have an extra ~2.3 life regen instead the scaling bonus resistance and scaling hp masteries, go ahead. (Yes, the regen is scaling as well, but when mid/late game fights will occur, no one will wait for you to regen anything, you either explode or not)
Now if we add Preservance to the picture, we actually have to accept the fact that you can have some preeeetty nice life regen. Then we wake up and take the 15% reduced summoner cooldowns, because more often than not, reduced flash, ignite/exhaust cooldown will net you more kills and saves, than (gonna make up a number now) +~7 life regen/5. And again, Insight has a nice mid and late game power as well.
The 4th tier where I actually had to take on my imaginary glasses, because 15% tenacity is just good, can't argue with that. Legendary Guardian should still be the g-to choice, as you can start your cc chain a million miles away, and your basic role is to get into the fray and endure the beatings. Though even if you are having one of those games, where you have to stick to your adc/apc, because that 20/0/0 Rengar is hunting them, Swiftness still won't top it. Also, Legendary Guardian means +4/4 resistances constantly at bot lane. But this is the one tier where I could see people taking swiftness once in a blue moon, though I won't agree with them. It's still not a meaningful choice, it's just sad to leave Tenacity behind.
And the playstyle defining keystones, all right, that's what we've been waiting for. Forget basic masteries, they are just to fill the void. Here we come, 3 different Leonas at least just from the resolve tree!! Grasp of Undying: This looks charming, I know you are already counting that 3% of ~3500 as damage sounds cool. It does, actually. Sadly, we don't start with ~3500hp, and while it hurts a bit during the laning phase too, Leona a.) never had problems with lacking early damage b.) landing your skills and cc is how you win the lane, an extra ~50 on hit damage is just luxury. Take ignite if you want a higher kill potential. Sadly, as fun as it could become later in the game, your job will still be to cc the living crap out of everyone and to start (or occasionally disengage) fights. The enemy carries won't die because you hit them in the face for ~200 dmg (after resistances), but because you put them on a plate for your assassins, or your tanky top laner, who actually benefits from this mastery, because unlike you, he has no other obligations other than "be an annoying asshole". Also, it would be hardly playstyle defining for you, because you auto-attack during the off-time anyway, and your build has been HP heavy too, so nothing would really change. Strength of the ages: No. I mean, it's good, but how on Earth could you pick this over Bond of Stone: Easiest keystone choice in my entire life. Percent based damage reduction which doesn't suffer from max/current hp damage and works vs. everything (ie. minions, dragon)?! This bonus is doubled when I'm near an ally and I happen to be on a lane with an ally 99% of the tme (damn you afkers!!)??! They also happen to be squishy, and this kestone mastery lets me take away from the damage he would receive, while I'm tanky as fuck since the very beginning??! .... Naaah, which one was the hp based bonus damage keystone mastery again? Totally want that instead.
I guess a good point could be raised, that while BoS just makes everything else a laughing matter, the liferegen masteries are actually a good combination with this one. Which is true. If I could pick all the masteries in one tree, I would definitely invest everything in this tree, because as I just said, BoS+liferegen sounds so damn neat during the early game! But I can't do that, and I'm still forced to choose. The only difference after knowing I'll pick BoS in the end is that I'm not choosing between useless and very good, but good and very good. A prime example why the new way of picking masteries, or rather, the options presented are pitiful. If you pick health regen nstead of a 15% reduction of one of the ost powerful skills (flash+ignite/exhaust) in the game which are accessible since lvl1, than you are probably the person who is happy, that now you won't look at your silver border at the loading screen, but your silver division 3 border instead.
Anyway, we have 12 useless points to spend, so let's get over with it:
Wanderer (5) - (won't change my opinion on Explorer, especially because BoS will probably make you hurt more during the laning phase, so you'll need Toughness even more so) Secret Stash - was it a hard choice? honestly? Tier 3 - The one example where Riot hit the nail in the head. Both of these are so damn useless, that it's not really obvious what you should take. I guess if you are one of those people who can even run out of mana with Leona, than pick Meditation, otherwise Merciless sounds like the way to go. Which is terrible to type out, because it's still a ridiculously ineffective mastery for you. Tier 4 - All right, on a serious note, this is the one and only tier where you can really choose between somewhat meaningful options. As much as I like Bandit, Dangerous Game have its' uses on an all-in support like Leona. Credits where it's due, I guess?
I really don't see how is this an interactive or gamestyle defining mastery system.
Don't want to make another WoT, so a quick rundown on Janna's no-brainer choices: Wanderer Secret Stash Meditation Bandit Intelligence Windspeaker's Blessing (once again, hardest choice in my life)
Recovery Toughness (I can already see people picking Explorer for that Janna brush-control) Runic Armor Insight
Damn. We can even switch Janna out with Nami and we get the same results.You'll need some math for Soraka to know whether you Preservance on her instead of Insight, I guess. Imo it's an easy Preservance, as flash is rather meh on Raka, and her second summoner spell is only secondary to the power of her constant heals.
So, there are a number of things that I think are unfair about your comparisons here, but the main point is that you're not comparing the season 6 tree with the season 5 tree, so it's not really a fair comparison.
In season 5, Leona, like most champions, has little to no variation in masteries. Everybody on probuilds takes 0/9/21, and while I do see some very minor variations in the 21 utility points, most of the variation I think comes down to people not caring enough to do the math to optimize their mastery page for an extremely minor improvement. I think there is a page that is unarguably "correct".
For season 6 though I think you're painting in broad strokes and not really seeing where the possible variation lies. For starters, I don't think you need to go 0/12/18 at all. I think 6/6/18 or 0/18/12 are arguably viable.
The problem here for me is that most of the middle tier of Utility is useless. Bandit is good, but for Leona who doesn't have real mana issues and is a low damage initiator, both Merciless and Meditation are useless.
However, Sorcery and Double-Edged Sword (Feast is useless you're not killing things) are strong. They won't be as strong late game as Bandit. However, Leona's damage early game is threatening and respectable, and Bandit won't do anything early in the game.
So you can easily see how 6/6/18 would be stronger early game, and 0/12/18 would be stronger late game. This means these two pages can be changed based on playstyle, preference, and team comps/strategies.
In fact, if you want a real threatening early game page, you can go 0/18/12, picking up Thunderlords Decree and Precision. These are both strong early game damage masteries. Thunderlords Decree won't scale well when you're not building damage items, but an extra 30 or so damage on both members of the enemy duo in your level 3 engage, plus a bunch of extra flat pen that's strongest early game, gives you a generous amount of additional early game threat.
What you give up is late game tankiness. Both Swiftness and Leg. Guardian are much stronger late game than early game. Bond of Stone is legitimately very good and I don't see a better defensive keystone for a support, this is a totally fair criticism, but it's also better late game than early game. Realistically Thunderlords Decree in an early game fight will do much more damage than Bond of Stone will prevent, and dealing damage is usually better than preventing it early.
So you might call 0/18/12 an early game, slightly cheesy mastery build, but it's a realistic choice and it's a choice that is not present in the season 5 system. A less cheesy early vs. late game choice is the choice between 6/6/18 and 0/12/18.
You have choices.
There's also choice within the defense tree. For Keystones no you don't have much of a choice that could be better. Again, a defensive keystone that did damage would provide a good differentiation from Bond of Stone, as would a difference between Strength of Ages and Undying that was more pronounced. I really think Strength of Ages and Undying are much too similar in comparison with the other trees (I also think Warlords Bloodlust and Ferver of Battle in offense are too similar).
But there's still choices earlier in the tree.
Swiftness vs. Legendary Guardian is not as preference based for Leona as it is for Rammus, but you still might grab Swiftness against a disengage heavy team with lots of slows and low damage output. You say it's not a "meaningful choice" but it absolutely is.
Perserverence vs. Insight is also a meaningful choice that's based on playstyle and preference for the exact reasons that you outlined. Decreased summoner spell cooldown I think is more important in bot lane than other lanes typically, but it's very arguable that it's just not actually all that helpful. People take it in season 5 because there's just no better option at that tier when you go 21 Utility, but I imagine in season 6 while there will be some resistance to not taking it, Perserverence is competitive.
For a bot lane tanky melee support that's one time where HP regen early game is actually kind of a big deal.
There's other things where I think you're right. For Leona in particular Tough Skin, Unyielding and Veterans Scars are obvious. But not every single tier has to provide a meaningful choice for every champion, as long as for every champion there are choices somewhere in the system. If every tier provided choice for every champion then the system would be too complex and it would take up too much of your time and reduce the fun factor.
So, in conclusion:
I DO think your criticism of Keystones for Leona (and tanky supports in general) is fair. There is no choice there unless you want to go cheesy and shoot for 0/18/12 instead. I do think that even if other tiers don't provide obvious choice, every champion should have a choice of keystones.
However, I think while you've made some legitimate criticisms of the new system, you've failed to compare it to the old system, and if you did so you'd find that the new system, while not perfect, is a marked improvement.
Janna is I think a champion with much less presentable choice. The system fails her a little bit with the lack of good support options in the Cunning tree, the fact that Windspeakers Blessing is basically specially designed for her, and the issue where the only options for point 6 of Ferocity are Double Edged Sword and Feast, and Feast is useless for supports and Double Edged Sword is useless for ranged supports.
On November 08 2015 13:03 Volband wrote: Hm, Let's see Leona. First of all, you want a resolve keystone, so you are going to invest all the way there, while the ferocity tree gives you exactly nothing, so the remaining points have to be assigned to cunning.
5 points to unyielding should be a no-brainer, and not just because it has a synergy with her W (and her future build), but because the health regen is useless. You bought only wards and potions to begin with early game, when such a life regen could matter, and now you can't even buy wards and start with more money, Also, you will most likely still start with targon, so the health regen is just useless. Same goes for Thresh and Braum.
So, Explorer or Tough Skin. Against ranged opponents at bot lane, it really isn't a question, Tough skin just gets you to reach lvl2/3 (whenever you want to start going ham) all the more safely, and after that, none of these two masteries are crucial in lane, though having tough skin still sounds much better, because your opponents will have to be close to your E range, and if not, it means you are zoning them out. Explorer can be fun, if you want to gank mid early, but you'll have mobility boots most of the time and rather fast, so you give up lane strength (inb4 someone tries to argue that some +12 movement speed in brush shenanigans will win bot lane more reliably, than tough skin) just to have a narrow window of opportunity when you can roam more efficently to mid lane. Meh. Whether explorer is better later in the game if you don't plan on buying some speedy boots... It's just too weird.
Runic armor vs Veteran scars is, once again, an easy one. Unless you are supporting an AP Janna of course, because then suddenly we are presented with some meaningful choices, but I'm going to be bold and assume that you will still see marksmen on your side at botlane, so veteran scars is just superior. Yeah, runic armor can be comboed with the whooping 2 hp/5sec of Recovery in the first tier, so if you want to waste 10 points to have an extra ~2.3 life regen instead the scaling bonus resistance and scaling hp masteries, go ahead. (Yes, the regen is scaling as well, but when mid/late game fights will occur, no one will wait for you to regen anything, you either explode or not)
Now if we add Preservance to the picture, we actually have to accept the fact that you can have some preeeetty nice life regen. Then we wake up and take the 15% reduced summoner cooldowns, because more often than not, reduced flash, ignite/exhaust cooldown will net you more kills and saves, than (gonna make up a number now) +~7 life regen/5. And again, Insight has a nice mid and late game power as well.
The 4th tier where I actually had to take on my imaginary glasses, because 15% tenacity is just good, can't argue with that. Legendary Guardian should still be the g-to choice, as you can start your cc chain a million miles away, and your basic role is to get into the fray and endure the beatings. Though even if you are having one of those games, where you have to stick to your adc/apc, because that 20/0/0 Rengar is hunting them, Swiftness still won't top it. Also, Legendary Guardian means +4/4 resistances constantly at bot lane. But this is the one tier where I could see people taking swiftness once in a blue moon, though I won't agree with them. It's still not a meaningful choice, it's just sad to leave Tenacity behind.
And the playstyle defining keystones, all right, that's what we've been waiting for. Forget basic masteries, they are just to fill the void. Here we come, 3 different Leonas at least just from the resolve tree!! Grasp of Undying: This looks charming, I know you are already counting that 3% of ~3500 as damage sounds cool. It does, actually. Sadly, we don't start with ~3500hp, and while it hurts a bit during the laning phase too, Leona a.) never had problems with lacking early damage b.) landing your skills and cc is how you win the lane, an extra ~50 on hit damage is just luxury. Take ignite if you want a higher kill potential. Sadly, as fun as it could become later in the game, your job will still be to cc the living crap out of everyone and to start (or occasionally disengage) fights. The enemy carries won't die because you hit them in the face for ~200 dmg (after resistances), but because you put them on a plate for your assassins, or your tanky top laner, who actually benefits from this mastery, because unlike you, he has no other obligations other than "be an annoying asshole". Also, it would be hardly playstyle defining for you, because you auto-attack during the off-time anyway, and your build has been HP heavy too, so nothing would really change. Strength of the ages: No. I mean, it's good, but how on Earth could you pick this over Bond of Stone: Easiest keystone choice in my entire life. Percent based damage reduction which doesn't suffer from max/current hp damage and works vs. everything (ie. minions, dragon)?! This bonus is doubled when I'm near an ally and I happen to be on a lane with an ally 99% of the tme (damn you afkers!!)??! They also happen to be squishy, and this kestone mastery lets me take away from the damage he would receive, while I'm tanky as fuck since the very beginning??! .... Naaah, which one was the hp based bonus damage keystone mastery again? Totally want that instead.
I guess a good point could be raised, that while BoS just makes everything else a laughing matter, the liferegen masteries are actually a good combination with this one. Which is true. If I could pick all the masteries in one tree, I would definitely invest everything in this tree, because as I just said, BoS+liferegen sounds so damn neat during the early game! But I can't do that, and I'm still forced to choose. The only difference after knowing I'll pick BoS in the end is that I'm not choosing between useless and very good, but good and very good. A prime example why the new way of picking masteries, or rather, the options presented are pitiful. If you pick health regen nstead of a 15% reduction of one of the ost powerful skills (flash+ignite/exhaust) in the game which are accessible since lvl1, than you are probably the person who is happy, that now you won't look at your silver border at the loading screen, but your silver division 3 border instead.
Anyway, we have 12 useless points to spend, so let's get over with it:
Wanderer (5) - (won't change my opinion on Explorer, especially because BoS will probably make you hurt more during the laning phase, so you'll need Toughness even more so) Secret Stash - was it a hard choice? honestly? Tier 3 - The one example where Riot hit the nail in the head. Both of these are so damn useless, that it's not really obvious what you should take. I guess if you are one of those people who can even run out of mana with Leona, than pick Meditation, otherwise Merciless sounds like the way to go. Which is terrible to type out, because it's still a ridiculously ineffective mastery for you. Tier 4 - All right, on a serious note, this is the one and only tier where you can really choose between somewhat meaningful options. As much as I like Bandit, Dangerous Game have its' uses on an all-in support like Leona. Credits where it's due, I guess?
I really don't see how is this an interactive or gamestyle defining mastery system.
Don't want to make another WoT, so a quick rundown on Janna's no-brainer choices: Wanderer Secret Stash Meditation Bandit Intelligence Windspeaker's Blessing (once again, hardest choice in my life)
Recovery Toughness (I can already see people picking Explorer for that Janna brush-control) Runic Armor Insight
Damn. We can even switch Janna out with Nami and we get the same results.You'll need some math for Soraka to know whether you Preservance on her instead of Insight, I guess. Imo it's an easy Preservance, as flash is rather meh on Raka, and her second summoner spell is only secondary to the power of her constant heals.
So, there are a number of things that I think are unfair about your comparisons here, but the main point is that you're not comparing the season 6 tree with the season 5 tree, so it's not really a fair comparison.
In season 5, Leona, like most champions, has little to no variation in masteries. Everybody on probuilds takes 0/9/21, and while I do see some very minor variations in the 21 utility points, most of the variation I think comes down to people not caring enough to do the math to optimize their mastery page for an extremely minor improvement. I think there is a page that is unarguably "correct".
For season 6 though I think you're painting in broad strokes and not really seeing where the possible variation lies. For starters, I don't think you need to go 0/12/18 at all. I think 6/6/18 or 0/18/12 are arguably viable.
The problem here for me is that most of the middle tier of Utility is useless. Bandit is good, but for Leona who doesn't have real mana issues and is a low damage initiator, both Merciless and Meditation are useless.
However, Sorcery and Double-Edged Sword (Feast is useless you're not killing things) are strong. They won't be as strong late game as Bandit. However, Leona's damage early game is threatening and respectable, and Bandit won't do anything early in the game.
So you can easily see how 6/6/18 would be stronger early game, and 0/12/18 would be stronger late game. This means these two pages can be changed based on playstyle, preference, and team comps/strategies.
In fact, if you want a real threatening early game page, you can go 0/18/12, picking up Thunderlords Decree and Precision. These are both strong early game damage masteries. Thunderlords Decree won't scale well when you're not building damage items, but an extra 30 or so damage on both members of the enemy duo in your level 3 engage, plus a bunch of extra flat pen that's strongest early game, gives you a generous amount of additional early game threat.
What you give up is late game tankiness. Both Swiftness and Leg. Guardian are much stronger late game than early game. Bond of Stone is legitimately very good and I don't see a better defensive keystone for a support, this is a totally fair criticism, but it's also better late game than early game. Realistically Thunderlords Decree in an early game fight will do much more damage than Bond of Stone will prevent, and dealing damage is usually better than preventing it early.
So you might call 0/18/12 an early game, slightly cheesy mastery build, but it's a realistic choice and it's a choice that is not present in the season 5 system. A less cheesy early vs. late game choice is the choice between 6/6/18 and 0/12/18.
You have choices.
There's also choice within the defense tree. For Keystones no you don't have much of a choice that could be better. Again, a defensive keystone that did damage would provide a good differentiation from Bond of Stone, as would a difference between Strength of Ages and Undying that was more pronounced. I really think Strength of Ages and Undying are much too similar in comparison with the other trees (I also think Warlords Bloodlust and Ferver of Battle in offense are too similar).
But there's still choices earlier in the tree.
Swiftness vs. Legendary Guardian is not as preference based for Leona as it is for Rammus, but you still might grab Swiftness against a disengage heavy team with lots of slows and low damage output. You say it's not a "meaningful choice" but it absolutely is.
Perserverence vs. Insight is also a meaningful choice that's based on playstyle and preference for the exact reasons that you outlined. Decreased summoner spell cooldown I think is more important in bot lane than other lanes typically, but it's very arguable that it's just not actually all that helpful. People take it in season 5 because there's just no better option at that tier when you go 21 Utility, but I imagine in season 6 while there will be some resistance to not taking it, Perserverence is competitive.
For a bot lane tanky melee support that's one time where HP regen early game is actually kind of a big deal.
There's other things where I think you're right. For Leona in particular Tough Skin, Unyielding and Veterans Scars are obvious. But not every single tier has to provide a meaningful choice for every champion, as long as for every champion there are choices somewhere in the system. If every tier provided choice for every champion then the system would be too complex and it would take up too much of your time and reduce the fun factor.
So, in conclusion:
I DO think your criticism of Keystones for Leona (and tanky supports in general) is fair. There is no choice there unless you want to go cheesy and shoot for 0/18/12 instead. I do think that even if other tiers don't provide obvious choice, every champion should have a choice of keystones.
However, I think while you've made some legitimate criticisms of the new system, you've failed to compare it to the old system, and if you did so you'd find that the new system, while not perfect, is a marked improvement.
Actually, that's nonsense. Comparing to masteries that require 0 effort to maintain is not really a useful comparison point. Unless they are inarguably superior its time better spent fixing Poppy and the still 100% fucked jungle.
The discussion is not about whether or not revamping masteries was an efficient use of Riots time and manpower (a criticism I already raised earlier in the thread).
The discussion is about whether or not the season 6 system is better than the season 5 system.
In fact, Monte.
You're on the PBE right?
If I made a list of new masteries I'd like to see that address problems I see in this system, such as there being no option in point 6 Ferocity for most Supports, would you post it and we can see if we can get a redpost?
While I think that is a non sequitur and a silly dismissal of a valid criticism, I would also argue its a waste of my time as I now must make new optimized pages. Thus, my preference would be: 1. Real talent system that has meaningful choices; 2. Eliminate all masteries; 3. Keep old, boring, masteries; 4. Make new, boring, but possibly slightly less boring, masteries.
You are, basically, arguing for changing all the road signs to KPH.
If you look at making new optimized pages as a waste of time, then you're probably going to see any changes to masteries as a waste of your time, and would prefer they keep the old system or remove it entirely.
I think there's some reasonable argument that the mastery system is unnecessary and could be removed entirely. But the fact is that's just not going to happen (too big of a change / would cause too many balance problems / would upset or confuse too many players), and I don't think suggesting options that are blatantly impossible is valid criticism.
I do think the argument that they should have kept the same masteries as season 5 (like they did from 4 to 5) is a valid argument, and again one that I made earlier in the thread.
Here is an interesting mastery system: Q-Tree, W-Tree, E-Tree. You only get one. T1 gives a flat +% damage/effect or duration. T2 is inherent cdr or range. Etc. But, like you said they won't do that because its against thier idea of winning/losing during champ select, but that is just an argument for eliminating the system, or going to a HOTS-style talent system.
@Ketara: I expected to read a reply which mainly highlights that it is not literally true that we never have a choice. But aside the 6/6/18 argument, I don't think anything you said is convincing. Yes, in the very early fights Thunderlord's Decree can be useful, but I deliberately not using the word impactful, because that would be stretching it. But you also give up legendary guardian/swiftness and BoS for it. Haven't seen the mastery in action, but reading it, I suppose it means you have to hit with all three of your skills, and even then, it only shocks the area around the target you are attacking, so their support might not even get damaged. It is a good argument if you want to prove that the choices are not obvious 100% of the time, but 9 out of 10 games you should probably still stick to BoS, because it's just that amazing and it's arguable whether holding your ground longer (and getting a way to protect your adc) will net you more damage in the longer run (which could be lvl4, if we are saying lvl 3 is when Thunderlord's at it's peak for Leona).
The choice feels more awkward to me than meaningful, even if it's considerable. Now imagine if Thunderlord's aoe (because I think it creates some kind of an aoe field) roots or slows. Ding-ding, suddenly that 40 or so damage is just an extra, and you gained an extra form of aoe cc. What if you could share the healing effect of Strength of Ages? BoS is still better, but now we are getting there, where with a few tweaks you might take SoA instead. What if Explorer would work in the enemy jungle (50% power for the bush effect there) and had some kind of scaling? Suddenly it sounds somewhat exciting. What if Feast worked in a way where if both players have this mastery, both of them would get healed, even if the other one dealt the killing blow. Maybe it would even have some extra, like +30 health if you share this mastery and only 15 sec cd. What if the Cunning's tree tier 3 masteries wouldn't suck ass for champions like Leona? What if Recovery gave 3hp/5?
Tier 3 and 4 in the ferocity tree know what's up. Those are the choices I'd like to have everywhere.
Thunderlords Decree says "third attack or spell" so I'd assume just an auto-Q-auto at level 1 would pop it.
You are ignoring the primary argument, in that you're not comparing it to the previous system at all. You're just calling it bad in general.
I think several of your problems with individual masteries in addition stem from not understanding the numbers behind how strong they actually are. If Thunderlords Decree also slowed it would be blatantly overpowered.
I'm also not sure how tier 3 cunning is bad on Leona. It doesn't give tanky stats sure, but it's not a tanky tree. CDR is good late game on Leona, and flat pen is good early game on Leona.
I thought tier 3 is Meditation vs Merciless. Than I was talking about tier 1.5 I guess.
I don't know why you want me to compare it to previous masteries though. Without the keystone masteries, S6 masteries look very boring and 1-dimensional, S5 beats it out, and with the keystone masteries, S6 wins, but ONLY because of them. It's not because they improved the mastery system, but because they topped it off, so I wouldn't call it a fair comparison.
I don't think (again, making up a number, I think balance comes next) a 25% slow (it can decay, last for 0.5 sec, once again, numbers can be tweaked) would be blatantly overpowered. BoS still gives you 8% damage reduction in fights, while the third one boosts your early game a lot.
I just wish Riot would be as ballsy as they are with some of the marskmen changes, or God forgive me, with dynamic queue. Yes, I love one of them and passionatly hate the other one, but at the very least I can say they dared to pump new blood into the game. The new mastery system has a good basis, but falls flat, aside from a few keystone masteries here and there.
Edit: For example, what if Recovery was 4 hp/5 and Unyielding was 7/8 %? Like actually getting there where you get the feeling of choosing between a strong early and late game mastery, instead of laughable numbers.
Looking at the new masteries I think that the meaningful choice idea Riot had, not really gonna happen. People more or less will still pick one mastery page for a champ and won't change it. Maybe for some champs in a specific compositions/roles you may want to change his 18 point mastery, but even then few will do it.
Regarding the part where you have to sacrifice something for something else and you need to make a decision, wasn't it like this until now as well? you could only put 30 points and had to sacrifice some stuff for another.
So, bottom line is that the new masteries are just different, nothing more or less.
On November 08 2015 18:14 Volband wrote: I thought tier 3 is Meditation vs Merciless. Than I was talking about tier 1.5 I guess.
I don't know why you want me to compare it to previous masteries though. Without the keystone masteries, S6 masteries look very boring and 1-dimensional, S5 beats it out, and with the keystone masteries, S6 wins, but ONLY because of them. It's not because they improved the mastery system, but because they topped it off, so I wouldn't call it a fair comparison.
I don't think (again, making up a number, I think balance comes next) a 25% slow (it can decay, last for 0.5 sec, once again, numbers can be tweaked) would be blatantly overpowered. BoS still gives you 8% damage reduction in fights, while the third one boosts your early game a lot.
I just wish Riot would be as ballsy as they are with some of the marskmen changes, or God forgive me, with dynamic queue. Yes, I love one of them and passionatly hate the other one, but at the very least I can say they dared to pump new blood into the game. The new mastery system has a good basis, but falls flat, aside from a few keystone masteries here and there.
Edit: For example, what if Recovery was 4 hp/5 and Unyielding was 7/8 %? Like actually getting there where you get the feeling of choosing between a strong early and late game mastery, instead of laughable numbers.
Meditation vs. Merciless is really shitty options for Leona. It's not shitty options for other champions, but I agree that a third option there would improve the system.
I don't know why you just want to post saying that the new system is bad if you're not comparing it to the old system. You think everything is bad, I think we get it.
Thunderlords Decree would be incredibly broken if it did a 25% slow. Possibly not on Leona, but compare it to some other champions who might take it.
Like, for Lux, Thunderlords Decree vs. Deathfire Touch is very balanced.
Thunderlords Decree at a full build will do something like 250 damage in an AOE, while Deathfire Touch will do about 80 damage. While Decree does a lot more burst damage, it's on a 30 second cooldown, and DFT should outpace it for sustained damage.
Thunderlords Decree is however a lot better at level 1, and if Lux can pop it at level 1 with an E+passive auto and get a slow on top of that preventing an enemy champion from getting away from more autos, that's just really oppressive early game.
There's a lot of champions that an extra slow on top of their existing kit would make their lane trades unfair.
I don't think masteries are where you want to be looking for "ballsy" changes. I see masteries as incremental things that assist a player in doing what they want with their champion, and I think Riot does too. I think the existing Keystones is already a pretty ballsy way to change it up.
Again, I think there are legitimate criticisms of it. They said in their post they're okay with not everything being a meaningful choice all of the time, but when it's something like Merciless vs. Meditation or Dangerous Game vs. Feast on Leona where there's basically nothing in there between four options that she even wants when the system all but requires she takes one of them, that's a problem and I think it's deserved to address that.
But on the whole I do think it's better than the older system. It's more interesting and does afford more choice, even if it doesn't afford as much choice as you might want in particular.
First glance mastery tree gave me the feeling of it being extremely one dimensional. Previous mastery tree had 3 panels which each had a moderate amount of diversity. I use moderate since some choices were obviously better than others (who was going to choose Thick Skin for example) But here you have a system that's drastically reduced in complexity and diversity and you have to devote less points in one of the three panels.
On November 08 2015 07:25 Ketara wrote:Because it's a better system
Ketara pls.
New system gives way less meaningful choice till the 18th point of the tree, it completely shafts anything that wants to be tanky plus the choices you do have to make don't make any sense at all.
On November 08 2015 19:19 Ketara wrote: I feel like if you want to have this discussion Fildun, you should do it with examples and analysis instead of blanket statements.
Especially since I've taken the time to do the same.
Yeah I probably should.
Alright, my main complaint is that they made everything that's not the 18th point almost not matter at all. Let's take a look at the first tree. First choice is between 4% attackspeed and 2% increased spell damage. 4% attackspeed is almost completely negligible. You might miss one creep less during the entire laning phase because of it, but that's about it. For junglers you might take one less auto from a camp, but you also might not. The 2% increased spell damage is nice for mages but it's still not all that significant. Now comes the first one point choice. Feast just straight up sucks balls, so everybody is going to take Double-edged sword here. Such choice. Wow. Next up is lifesteal/spellvamp vs scaling ad/ap. Obviously the lifesteal/spellvamp is better for laning and probably also for bruisers in teamfights while the ad/ap is the best option later in the game for mids and ADC's, since they are either at full HP, backing or dead most of the time, so the lifesteal/spellvamp isn't really that useful there. Neither of these options really have a "wow" feel to me, nor are they that impactful (again). Also note that Vampiricism is just straight up a better Feast. Now we have Bounty Hunter vs Oppressor. Bounty Hunter is just straight up a win harder mastery, if the damage from this mastery becomes relevant you'll most likely win anyway. Oppressor is nice for laning with Braum or playing with CC-heavy teams, but if you're in a team with little CC both of these options just suck. Example: Say I'm playing Garen. I'm pretty sure I want 18 in Ferocity, but both of these options do absolutely nothing for me. Next up: Armpen vs magicpen, pretty straightforward, probably the best designed choice in the tree. Now for the 18th point, mages are gonna take Deathfire Touch and all the AD champions are gonna take Fervor of Battle. Maybe some ADC's are going to take the crit heal, but if that's also on a 2 sec CD (can't really discern that from the wording) it's not really that great, especially since Fervor of Battle is so incredibly powerful. Again, not really a choice, even for the 18th point.
I'm too lazy to do the other 2 trees as well, let's discuss this one first.
I think you are trying to look at it in terms of what gives the most statistical advantage. Which is certainly the way to look at season 5 masteries, because you can often just cherrypick everything you want and figure out what is mathematically the best.
It's not really the way to look at these. I'm out of the house ATM so I can comment on each tier of the offense tree later on, but let's talk about Feast vs. Double Edged Sword, because that's one where I think the new system absolutely gets it right.
This isn't a choice of one being stronger than the other. It's a choice between offense and defense.
I think the issue here is you're undervaluing the Feast point.
Feast in season 5 gives, with 10cs/min, 0.5hp per second and 0.16 mana per second.
Season 6 feast should give 20hp per minion wave, or 0.66hp per second.
So they are roughly equivalent. But its not the whole picture. Season 5 feast is tied to Butcher, which most people see as pretty shitty, so you pay 2 points for this regen. And even then, most people take feast in their pages because they realize that an extra potions worth of Regen in early laning is really fucking strong. In fact, a brief look at probuilds and I can find Koreans who take Feast in season 5 but do not take Double Edged Sword.
This is also assuming diamond level CS BTW. I imagine the old feast was difficult to balance as it becomes stronger the better a player you are.
So, feast is actually pretty good, IF you need extra laning Regen. Double edged sword is also obviously pretty good, IF you can get away with taking a little extra damage.
The point is they don't do the same thing and you can only get one if them.
So lets take a champion like oh, lets say Kassadin. Does Kassadin benefit from double edged sword? Absolutely, he's melee and more damage on him is great.
But Kassadin also has a lot of lane opponents who can really punish him early on. It's not hard to see how an extra 100-150 HP in early Regen really benefits Kassadin.
This means that which one you take isn't a choice of which is objectively better. It's about how safe you feel in your matchup. This is matchup dependent, but its also player dependent. Maybe you're Kassadin against Talon and you don't have many games on Kass and you're not confident in your ability to stay alive in lane, so you take Feast.
But at the same time, maybe you're a Kassadin main and you've been wrecking Talons for ages and you're confident you can take the riskier mastery, outplay the other guy and then reap your extra damage later in the game.
It's really not obvious which is better. It depends on you the player, not on the math behind it. And this relationship at this tier isn't just like this for Kassadin. There will be champions where its much more obvious that one is better than the other, but I'd say for a majority of champions this particular tier actually offers very interesting, meaningful choice.
So, some quick tidbits on the other shit in the Ferocity tree.
Fury vs. Sorcery I think is a pretty poor choice because it's going to come down to whether or not you do more damage with abilities or autoattacks, and for very few champions will there be any variation there. Varus maybe. Maybe.
Natural Talent vs. Vampirism I think there's a legitimate argument as to it being offense vs. defense, very similarly to Double Edged Sword vs. Feast. I think it's a good choice here.
However, in general I think people will heavily prefer Natural Talent here as they've been so accustomed to just not getting Vampirism masteries for a long time. I'm even a little biased against it and I'd like to do some math on just how good Vampirism will be. Natural Talent in general does not impress me very much unless you're a hybrid champion like Kayle or Akali.
Bounty Hunter I just don't really like very much? I think I share some of Filduns criticisms about Bounty Hunter being a win more mastery. I don't like conditional power masteries and would probably greatly prefer Oppressor unless I'm a champion with very low CC. In general I don't think there's much choice here unless I'm an ADC in a duo lane and deciding to take or not take Oppressor depending on who my support is.
The Pen masteries I think is a terrible choice. While there is a choice, it's not meaningful because for a given champion one will obviously be better. I'm also worried that these masteries will be so strong that they will be too much stronger than Precision in the Cunning tree and will push Assassins towards 18 Ferocity when Riot wants Assassins to lean towards 18 Cunning. Would need math to confirm that.
I'm also not too happy with the Ferocity keystones. There's choice between Warlords and Fervor because Fervor will obviously outdamage Warlords while Warlords provides sustain, and that will be a meaningful choice for ADCs.
For AD Casters there will be a choice between Warlords and Deathfire Touch, depending on how much the champion autos.
But for Mages there's really no choice. I suppose that's because Mages will often be choosing between DFT and Thunderlord. So maybe, upon closer inspection, there's more choice than I thought and I'm not too upset with it.
So, while I think there's more choice in the tree than Fildun, I think some of his criticisms are legitimate.
In general I think Ferocity is the tree I like the least. In season 5 I think the Offense tree actually has the most opportunity for variation, so the comparison on heavy offense champions between season 5 and season 6 may look fairly paltry.
I'd like it if they'd add Expose Weakness as a 6 point mastery in Ferocity to compete with Feast and Double Edged Sword for supports who want to go 6/18/6 or 6/6/18.
Wait, does Riot want assasins to get 18 into Cunning? There's literally nothing there for them after the 12th point. Most assasins will just go 18/12/0 and that's the optimal build here.
On November 09 2015 00:54 Fildun wrote: Wait, does Riot want assasins to get 18 into Cunning? There's literally nothing there for them after the 12th point. Most assasins will just go 18/12/0 and that's the optimal build here.
Decree is decent on assassins, so is the MS steroid or people like Talent to GTFO.
On November 09 2015 00:54 Fildun wrote: Wait, does Riot want assasins to get 18 into Cunning? There's literally nothing there for them after the 12th point. Most assasins will just go 18/12/0 and that's the optimal build here.
It depends on how good the flat pen is vs the percent pen, we would need to run some numbers to find that out.
Thunderlords is much better for burst damage than DFT is.
Why did Lyte say not many people are getting carried now in duo queue, when it is known, that DQ is weighted in the current system? I thought they said they'll won't weight premades in dynamic queues, they'll just try to match them with a team having the same amount of premades, but they won't receive an MMR penalty unlike DQ-ing people now.
Also, premade 4s are not talked about at all. Not sure how Lyte thinks giving the solo players ultimate report power will solve toxicity. There must be an USA weapon law comparison there, but let's just say I don't believe fighting fire with fire in this case is beneficial for anyone,
On November 09 2015 14:26 Volband wrote: Why did Lyte say not many people are getting carried now in duo queue, when it is known, that DQ is weighted in the current system? I thought they said they'll won't weight premades in dynamic queues, they'll just try to match them with a team having the same amount of premades, but they won't receive an MMR penalty unlike DQ-ing people now.
Also, premade 4s are not talked about at all. Not sure how Lyte thinks giving the solo players ultimate report power will solve toxicity. There must be an USA weapon law comparison there, but let's just say I don't believe fighting fire with fire in this case is beneficial for anyone,
That's a different thing. The mmr penalty for matchmaking a duo queue is because it assumes a duo is more coordinated than 2 solos, so they should face slighter better players. Lyte is claiming that there aren't many people who are ranked a lot higher than they should be because they duo with good players who carry them every game.
On November 09 2015 00:54 Fildun wrote: Wait, does Riot want assasins to get 18 into Cunning? There's literally nothing there for them after the 12th point. Most assasins will just go 18/12/0 and that's the optimal build here.
It depends on how good the flat pen is vs the percent pen, we would need to run some numbers to find that out.
Thunderlords is much better for burst damage than DFT is.
Looking at the numbers and the average armor that the assasin target has, I'd say that the flat pen is much better.
With these new changes there's a lot less damage you can get from masteries, so I'd think that most assasins would go for a damage keystone instead of anything else.
On November 09 2015 18:42 Mikau wrote: Speaking of new fancy stuff.
Do you still gain/lose MMR during the off season?
Does MMR (soft) reset at the start of the new season, or at the start of the off season?
yeah the mmr will continue to change as usual and the latest mmr you have before the soft reset will be taken into account for the placements, not the mmr that you'll have at the end of the season, this one is only for the rewards.
On November 09 2015 18:25 M2 wrote: So, all these new fancy stuff come in couple of days? Immediately after the season end? no time for nostalgic fooling around for few weeks?
I must have missed something. Where does Riot announce when the preseason updates will be in effect? I'm trying to search for any official post or announcement, but can't seem to find anything :/
On November 09 2015 18:25 M2 wrote: So, all these new fancy stuff come in couple of days? Immediately after the season end? no time for nostalgic fooling around for few weeks?
I must have missed something. Where does Riot announce when the preseason updates will be in effect? I'm trying to search for any official post or announcement, but can't seem to find anything :/
On November 10 2015 01:45 Frolossus wrote: mejais sometimes gets picked up on certain supports. sword of the occult doesn't
For me Sword of the occult was very important to my game plan or game play.
I play assassin type of top laners like rengar, panteon even master yi with fighting summoner - ignite or exhaust. I rely on winning the lane then getting SOTO and start roaming.
Usually even successful roaming without SOTO puts you behind the enemy top laner who safely farms with TP, however, with SOTO the stacks you gain compensate for the missed CS and experience, but you also helped your team a lot.
Its high risk high reward strat, a bit cheesy, but inst things like that what makes the game more interesting and not stale?
The point is that there is no need to remove stuff if the only reason is that its not used a lot. If something is not considered toxic or problematic, then leave it, so some niche strats can appear, there is no need for everyone to do the same optimal set up. At least this is what I think
On November 10 2015 02:13 Caiada wrote: I think Mejai's and soto should both be gone, but hey, at least one has actual use cases that aren't "buy when you'd win the game anyway."
But why something that is not problematic or toxic should be removed, even if its used 1% of the time, still people may come up with fancy ideas for it. For example I developed a whole anti TP top strat around the SOTO item, whats the downside of things like that?
Logical design. I don't think Mejai's and SotO are that terrible for this, but the most obvious was old Zeke's Herald. It's psychology. If you give one hundred people an option in a game, especially one that looks appealing, a majority will try it. The problem is old Zeke's Herald was shit no matter how good it looked, so it should be removed. So it creates a weird situation where you're baiting people into doing something stupid. And then it gets worse when the player either doesn't have enough information to know it's stupid (uptime on Zeke's aura was horrible to judge and real bad in general; lifesteal is a stat that's hard to value.) or there are other factors interfering like team comp, other build choices, and so on. Because it's really hard to judge items that aren't just mathematically better, the use cases for all your items should really be as clear as possible. Not obvious, but clear. People think this removes choice or diversity but otherwise people either build dumb shit because your design led them to believe it wasn't dumb or they just build the same stuff over and over because they know it works and the rest of your crap didn't.
That's probably not very clear, but maybe it makes some sense.
In the two stacking items' case, they're obviously intended for assassins, but the moment you're behind on one, you shouldn't have that item. They're actually way better for poke champs and supports, which isn't obvious because neither naturally get tons of kills. Playing with risk when the game is more team-focused than ever and you're only one moving part out of five seems terrible just looking at it.
They then made Mejai's great for champs that want to roam immediately, so I don't fuckin' know. It's Riot being Riot and they really hate AD assassins, I guess?
On November 09 2015 14:26 Volband wrote: Why did Lyte say not many people are getting carried now in duo queue, when it is known, that DQ is weighted in the current system? I thought they said they'll won't weight premades in dynamic queues, they'll just try to match them with a team having the same amount of premades, but they won't receive an MMR penalty unlike DQ-ing people now.
Also, premade 4s are not talked about at all. Not sure how Lyte thinks giving the solo players ultimate report power will solve toxicity. There must be an USA weapon law comparison there, but let's just say I don't believe fighting fire with fire in this case is beneficial for anyone,
That's a different thing. The mmr penalty for matchmaking a duo queue is because it assumes a duo is more coordinated than 2 solos, so they should face slighter better players. Lyte is claiming that there aren't many people who are ranked a lot higher than they should be because they duo with good players who carry them every game.
Which seems strange that they can know. People who duo a lot will have MMR that you cannot disambiguate between.
On November 10 2015 02:46 Caiada wrote: Logical design. I don't think Mejai's and SotO are that terrible for this, but the most obvious was old Zeke's Herald. It's psychology. If you give one hundred people an option in a game, especially one that looks appealing, a majority will try it. The problem is old Zeke's Herald was shit no matter how good it looked, so it should be removed. So it creates a weird situation where you're baiting people into doing something stupid. And then it gets worse when the player either doesn't have enough information to know it's stupid (uptime on Zeke's aura was horrible to judge and real bad in general; lifesteal is a stat that's hard to value.) or there are other factors interfering like team comp, other build choices, and so on. Because it's really hard to judge items that aren't just mathematically better, the use cases for all your items should really be as clear as possible. Not obvious, but clear. People think this removes choice or diversity but otherwise people either build dumb shit because your design led them to believe it wasn't dumb or they just build the same stuff over and over because they know it works and the rest of your crap didn't.
That's probably not very clear, but maybe it makes some sense.
In the two stacking items' case, they're obviously intended for assassins, but the moment you're behind on one, you shouldn't have that item. They're actually way better for poke champs and supports, which isn't obvious because neither naturally get tons of kills. Playing with risk when the game is more team-focused than ever and you're only one moving part out of five seems terrible just looking at it.
They then made Mejai's great for champs that want to roam immediately, so I don't fuckin' know. It's Riot being Riot and they really hate AD assassins, I guess?
Zeke's would be so hilariously good with Kalista though.
Rango's Bonetooth is still pretty much SoTO. Kinda going with Riot's "build to your strengths" design, it might make sense on him to get insane scaling from kills.
On November 10 2015 02:46 Caiada wrote: Logical design. I don't think Mejai's and SotO are that terrible for this, but the most obvious was old Zeke's Herald. It's psychology. If you give one hundred people an option in a game, especially one that looks appealing, a majority will try it. The problem is old Zeke's Herald was shit no matter how good it looked, so it should be removed. So it creates a weird situation where you're baiting people into doing something stupid. And then it gets worse when the player either doesn't have enough information to know it's stupid (uptime on Zeke's aura was horrible to judge and real bad in general; lifesteal is a stat that's hard to value.) or there are other factors interfering like team comp, other build choices, and so on. Because it's really hard to judge items that aren't just mathematically better, the use cases for all your items should really be as clear as possible. Not obvious, but clear. People think this removes choice or diversity but otherwise people either build dumb shit because your design led them to believe it wasn't dumb or they just build the same stuff over and over because they know it works and the rest of your crap didn't.
That's probably not very clear, but maybe it makes some sense.
In the two stacking items' case, they're obviously intended for assassins, but the moment you're behind on one, you shouldn't have that item. They're actually way better for poke champs and supports, which isn't obvious because neither naturally get tons of kills. Playing with risk when the game is more team-focused than ever and you're only one moving part out of five seems terrible just looking at it.
They then made Mejai's great for champs that want to roam immediately, so I don't fuckin' know. It's Riot being Riot and they really hate AD assassins, I guess?
Zeke's would be so hilariously good with Kalista though.
Rango's Bonetooth is still pretty much SoTO. Kinda going with Riot's "build to your strengths" design, it might make sense on him to get insane scaling from kills.
Zekes was really amazing for a lot of AD's. The issue with Zekes wasn't that it wasn't gold efficient or strong (when you get it it can be between 5 to 10% more DPS for your ADC, plus the lifesteal which is great at that point).
The issue with Zekes was that you couldn't buy it; it had 1600 gold of dead space in the build order on an item which, because its power was in the aura, only supports could afford to purchase.
Ghosting Through this Thread was fun, the anti-rito drama was out of control lol.
Quinn is going to be the biggest question mark in the new changes - we'll see how good she ends up. I agree with Rito that she should be mid, but the question will be how the hell does she get waveclear. Shes a TF with more mobility and damage but much worse waveclear. We'll see
Zekes was bad because the stats were awful on supports before the changes and its optimization case was All over the place. Esp when you're comparing it to something with more ubiquitous utility like Crucible or Talisman on the smallest budget in the game. New Zekes does what Old Zekes was supposed to do but is obvious in how it does it.
Zekes was also bad because lifesteal is typically bad on 4/5 of the characters on your team. I had a post many moons ago that showed and counted the autos of characters in teamfights, and other than the ADC it was typically 2-3 autos even for AD characters like renekton, talon and jax.
I havent done this with the new toplane meta, but that was changed after zekes, so its not really relevant.
I would argue, that if you're primarily a peel support, even if the stats aren't the most efficient for you, the ability to add more multiplicative power stats to your AD outweighed the downsides even when you didn't have many/any else who could make use of it. That is, the 1000 gold or so of stats for your AD would be worth more due to their higher scaling than 1600 gold of stats for yourself.
But you still couldn't sit on the cash to buy it even then.
edit: Just realized this is the preseason thread. So enough about that.
I think the new masteries are better. Not ideal maybe, but definitely better
I'm hoping that Riot will fix some of the new Champion Select bugs and visuals cause it looks promising. Also waiting for queue screen is pimped up as well.
Cull 450 gold +5 Attack Damage +3 Life on Hit UNIQUE Passive: Killing a minion grants 1 additional gold. Killing 100 minions grants an additional 300 bonus gold immediately and disables this passive.
This item, don't know what to think about it.
Edit : Also jesus, there are so many changes it masteries/champions/items that I just can't keep up ;o
Death's Dance 3400 Gold +65 Attack Damage +10% Cooldown Reduction UNIQUE Passive: Dealing physical damage heals for 12% of the damage dealt. (33% effectiveness for multi-target effects.) UNIQUE Passive: 12% of damage taken is dealt as a Bleed effect over 3 seconds instead.
On November 10 2015 14:02 Goumindong wrote: I would argue, that if you're primarily a peel support, even if the stats aren't the most efficient for you, the ability to add more multiplicative power stats to your AD outweighed the downsides even when you didn't have many/any else who could make use of it. That is, the 1000 gold or so of stats for your AD would be worth more due to their higher scaling than 1600 gold of stats for yourself.
But you still couldn't sit on the cash to buy it even then.
edit: Just realized this is the preseason thread. So enough about that.
I think the new masteries are better. Not ideal maybe, but definitely better
Eh, not really, because in most cases for supports you can translate that amount of gold right to your ADC just buy building a selfish item. Just looking at Janna, a NLR, is worth 3.6% slow, 42 HP, 6 AD, and 30 HP/S(aoe) ignoring damage, just for your AD.
But you appear confused or something, the point is old, old zekes was bad because AOE lifesteal is more worthless than AOE spellvamp in a 5 vayne comp in 9.999999/10 scenarios.
I made D5 on my main like 3 months ago, after that I only played one game on it every other week in order to keep my lp from decaying. Can't wait to be able to use it again :p
On November 10 2015 15:16 739 wrote: Also new "Eye" items, good or bad?
FotM and Talisman's actives are too good to sacrifice IMO. Eye of Watchers is good on Spellthief supports if you dont plan to swap into FotM/Talisman later.
On November 10 2015 11:38 Goumindong wrote: Zekes was really amazing for a lot of AD's. The issue with Zekes wasn't that it wasn't gold efficient or strong (when you get it it can be between 5 to 10% more DPS for your ADC, plus the lifesteal which is great at that point).
The issue with Zekes was that you couldn't buy it; it had 1600 gold of dead space in the build order on an item which, because its power was in the aura, only supports could afford to purchase.
It was actually competitive with Wriggle's on several junglers when jungler itemization was terrible (since you're basically trading armor and Wriggle's proc for HP and CDR, which was a reasonable tradeoff for several champs). But that was simply a product of bad itemization for them in general and it lost that niche when Riot revamped jungle items.
TBH the item always made more sense as a jungler purchase than a support one given it's stat distribution, so if Riot wanted to keep that item reasonable they'd have had to roll it into one of the jungler item upgrades.
Btw is it just me or are there no jungle masteries anymore? Whats going to happen with junglers who had a rough time early clearing and needed the dmg reduction? Or even needed to spec into the bleed to clear fast enough to not die?
If I remember right, I think they made the jungle easier overall between the jungle mob stats and the modified jungle items. That's the impression I got from Monte, anyway.
There are still jungle-relevant masteries. With this setup you get:
20 extra health per camp, sometimes more.
5 extra damage to monsters.
Extra healing from potions.
2 hp5.
-2 damage from monsters.
Plus you can still go down whichever tree is most relevant to you and get your keystone mastery.
In addition the new jungle items are cheaper (350g) which allows you to either buy a Refillable Potion or 3 Health Potions. There's a 250 hp difference between those two options (in favor of the Health Potions), but the former can be upgraded into a Hunter's Potion or a Corrupting Potion.
Also, Gromps and Krugs do ~8 less damage per attack now.
All in all the jungle is easier. If your character could jungle before they can probably jungle just as well/better now with a Refillable Potion. If they struggled before they can probably do just fine with regular Healing Potions. I think most players will err toward the latter in general since it's safer, even if it's less cost effective in the long run.
Initial preseason patch notes are out. There's some stuff in here we hadn't seen (I missed?) before like what the hell:
Pushing advantage
Minions get combat bonuses when your team has a level advantage over the opposing team
Comboing with the turret changes above, minions now get stronger to help the winning team press their advantage and close out the game
MINION DAMAGE BONUS If your team's average level is higher than the enemy's, your minions deal 10% bonus damage to enemy minions. If you've taken cumulatively more turrets than the enemy team, damage is further increased by 10% for each turret you have over your opponents. ENRAGE If your team's average level is at least 3 higher than the enemy's and you've taken 2 or more towers in a given lane, your minions in that lane deal 90% more damage to enemy minions MINION DAMAGE REDUCTION If your team's average level is higher than the enemy's, your minions take less damage from enemy minions equal to (tower differential x level differential) + 1. This number can't fall below 1. IRONCLAD If your team's average level is at least 3 higher than the enemy's and you've taken 2 or more towers in a given lane, your minions in that lane take 7 less damage from enemy minions
I don't really understand the purpose of that change. Won't it just make snowballing even worse? When you get ahead due to XP/Gold now you get ahead due to your minions being better too? They basically want games to end super quickly if an enemy gets a big enough lead. Seems really odd.
This just removes lane control as a skill now. What the hell.
Using average team level to determine anything is stupid IMO, a lot of things Riot are doing seem to be further removing from individual aspect of the game
Minions get combat bonuses when your team has a level advantage over the opposing team
Comboing with the turret changes above, minions now get stronger to help the winning team press their advantage and close out the game
MINION DAMAGE BONUS If your team's average level is higher than the enemy's, your minions deal 10% bonus damage to enemy minions. If you've taken cumulatively more turrets than the enemy team, damage is further increased by 10% for each turret you have over your opponents. ENRAGE If your team's average level is at least 3 higher than the enemy's and you've taken 2 or more towers in a given lane, your minions in that lane deal 90% more damage to enemy minions MINION DAMAGE REDUCTION If your team's average level is higher than the enemy's, your minions take less damage from enemy minions equal to (tower differential x level differential) + 1. This number can't fall below 1. IRONCLAD If your team's average level is at least 3 higher than the enemy's and you've taken 2 or more towers in a given lane, your minions in that lane take 7 less damage from enemy minions
main thing i see from this is if a team has a dc/afk then its basically an auto loss. Which is meh as it stops games being dragged out to 40+mins because the team with five has some terrible players. With five players a 3 level gap on average should never happen. For the minor buffs it looks like a nice buff to push compositions and snowballing in general for competitive.
On November 11 2015 05:29 Alaric wrote: Kill someone early enough that you're sometimes higher level than them, say 6 when they're 5.5. You can't freeze the lane anymore.
Dang, these guys at Riot are geniuses.
woah :o but freezing lane of people is a huge way to punish people in lane. You can still shove people under turret and harass them there on certain champions though. To beginners its very good news. I remember my newb day and if i ever play with new people they get zoned super hard and just have no fun.
They're making more concurrent systemic changes than really anybody could keep up with completely. Maybe take a week to actually see it in action first, iunno.
On November 11 2015 06:31 Maluk wrote: What the hell ? This is about as long as the complete works of Aristotle, am I expected to read these "notes" if I want to play League of Legends ?
What the hell is the point of Corrupting Potion? In the first paragraph of the patch notes they talk about how opponents were having a bad time trying to burn down your sustain when you could just flask, tp, and come back with a full flask. That sucked right? SO WE ADDED OFFENSIVE CAPABILITIES TO FLASK LOL!
On November 11 2015 09:07 Frolossus wrote: are the jungle camp xp decreases going to prevent you from hitting level 3 after the first 3 camps?
I think if you have a jungle item it's unchanged, unless I'm missing something, going by the patch notes you should be +5 xp(net) per camp with a jungle item.
Hey guys, so just a quick final post on our mastery discussion.
Did some math while I was unceremoniously banned for being an offtopic shitposter.
In terms of the tier 5 pen masteries of Ferocity vs. Cunning, Cunning is in general WAY better.
Precision vs. Mpen Precision is just straight up better. It's better for mpen early game while also giving arpen, and late game it's better against less than 200 MR if you have a Void Staff, and less than 100 MR if you don't have a void staff.
So, for burst mages, 12/18/0 is obviously better than 18/12/0. For sustained damage mages who get a lot from Deathfire Touch and typically delay Void a while such as Viktor, 18/12/0 is probably better.
For AD Assassins it's more a difference between early game and late game, because it's 7 flat arpen vs. 3+0.3 flat arpen.
18/12/0 is more an aggressive early game build because 7 flat arpen at level 1 is a lot. If you snowball, the extra sustained damage from the Ferocity keystone helps you kill a second target after you've already instagibbed the first one.
But the safer late game burst damage page is 12/18/0.
Precision being so strong also skews its value for hybrid damage dealers. Kayle for example is a champion that I think might really benefit from 12/18/0 with Precision and Stormraiders Surge.
Jungle exp changes don't impact double jungling (unless it's tight, since there's as much exp total if the jungler kills every single big monster), but they mean you can't make the "camp -> tp top level 2" plan anymore, especially with TP's cd raised.
Graves seems like a first tier ban, nothing fun to play against him. Didn't even notice that you can get 3 pots as starter for jungler. Nice. New masteries seems pretty decent to be honest, I can feel difference (+ new jungle is like super easy) There are shitload of trolls in game, because season has ended so if You don't want to grind hardcore, let it go ~~
Edit : New to figure out best masteries for ADC/AD Jungle.
Edit: Also, does someone want to tell Phreak that a mastery that gives +0%->+5% damage dealt based on unique champions killed is poor on non-hyper carries, compared to a consistent 2.5% increased damage against impaired targets. Especially on a champion like Riven, who gives her own CC, and is not particularly likely to clean up a ton of kills until late game.
EPT![[image loading]](http://na.leagueoflegends.com/sites/default/files/styles/wide_medium/public/upload/header_1280x720.jpg?itok=BWQarp4o)
![[image loading]](https://am-a.akamaihd.net/image?f=http://news.cdn.leagueoflegends.com/public/images/articles/2015/october_2015/PSCH/marksmen_itemization.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://am-a.akamaihd.net/image?f=http://news.cdn.leagueoflegends.com/public/images/articles/2015/october_2015/PSCH/keystone_masteries_v2.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://am-a.akamaihd.net/image?f=http://news.cdn.leagueoflegends.com/public/images/articles/2015/october_2015/PSCH/vision.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://am-a.akamaihd.net/image?f=http://news.cdn.leagueoflegends.com/public/images/articles/2015/october_2015/PSCH/starting_items_v2.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSbWjr4UEAAQDgF.png:large)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSgt90dXIAAAJvW.png)
You're right about the LW change though, it's really noticeable. Also BT lifesteal is no longer unique.
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CS8AsNJWIAA5Wig.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yC-msYSXW5M/Vjl5KMqaJjI/AAAAAAAA0As/bS6ACX6lO4M/s640/done.jpg)
