EPTIt feels like they put on a small cast delay on the reset to her R. QRWEQing camps don't work it feels like.
EDIT: NVM. I am just bad and can't play her because
[Patch 6.11] Meeeeee-ow! General Discussion - Page 4
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
It feels like they put on a small cast delay on the reset to her R. QRWEQing camps don't work it feels like. EDIT: NVM. I am just bad and can't play her because | ||
|
DarkCore
Germany4194 Posts
On June 02 2016 09:46 Amui wrote: Swain has been getting a ton of picks. Hes strong in lane and absolutely dumpsters the common melee picks. Hes a tanky dps from mid or top. Yeah he doesn't have that much solo kill potential, but he brings 2-3x more damage than a maokai while being pretty much just as tanky. he's not as tanky directly, but you have to focus him down or he just heals up stupidly fast. He's not super OP, but he's incredibly annoying to play against. He also never runs out of mana at some point, brick wall top laner. http://www.surrenderat20.net/2016/06/61-pbe-update.html is there anyone who actually thinks grasp needs more nerfs? its sub par late game mastery every ekko,fizz tank in LCK takes fervor already. Seriously can riot be more out of touch Grasp is a fine ability, I like how it falls off late game but dominates early. On a side note, Lucian ult critting seems a really funny way to deal with BC Ghostblade, might be what we need but I honestly don't want the horror of having no idea how much Lucian will ult me for. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5232 Posts
On June 02 2016 19:52 Redox wrote: Obviously if they have to make so many corrections to it (and still have tons of flaws in it). You would think they can calculate how all this stuff (queue times, average skill differences etc) will turn out in advance with all the queue data they have. Apparently not as it is actually a trial and error process for them. Idk if its in the nature of the issue or incompetence. Data doesn't mean they can perfectly predict how their algorithms will behave. You could always predict on a conceptual/theoretical level how it should work, but that doesn't mean that will translate to the practical level. If you want an overarching system it should work on all levels, not just on the lower end of the spectrum, while the high end gets fucked. I'm actually more and more in favour of splitting their system for a lower elo and a higher elo algorithm. | ||
|
SHr3DD3r
Pakistan2137 Posts
| ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On June 02 2016 21:01 Uldridge wrote: Data doesn't mean they can perfectly predict how their algorithms will behave. You could always predict on a conceptual/theoretical level how it should work, but that doesn't mean that will translate to the practical level. If you want an overarching system it should work on all levels, not just on the lower end of the spectrum, while the high end gets fucked. I'm actually more and more in favour of splitting their system for a lower elo and a higher elo algorithm. You also have to remember that they had other models to look at when implementing their system not just data from previous system. Could have looked at how other games worked with what they implemented and what solutions those companies came up with. Think they just tried to reinvent the wheel thinking they wouldn't run into the exact same problems others did before them then when they do run into those problems now they scrambling to find a solution. Amateur work really. edit: The edge case situation was always going to be bad, even when they announced the system change people talked about how bad the edge case is going to be. Since League is so much larger than most games it just means this edge case effects a lot more people than normal so I really don't get how they didn't have a plan in place from the outset. Maybe they thought they were large enough that the edge case situation would be diluted? Seems reasonable assumption to me if they had a backup plan ready as soon the system proved that wasn't the case but instead they had nothing. | ||
|
Frolossus
United States4779 Posts
| ||
|
Jek
Denmark2771 Posts
On June 02 2016 20:18 DarkCore wrote: he's not as tanky directly, but you have to focus him down or he just heals up stupidly fast. He's not super OP, but he's incredibly annoying to play against. He also never runs out of mana at some point, brick wall top laner. Grasp is a fine ability, I like how it falls off late game but dominates early. On a side note, Lucian ult critting seems a really funny way to deal with BC Ghostblade, might be what we need but I honestly don't want the horror of having no idea how much Lucian will ult me for. Personally I think the proposed Lucian change is bloody stupid, it smells like "hey you found a new way to play champion X, that's not how we wanted so go fuck youself" - yeah I'm exaggerating but meh. Riot have done it before with multiple other champions most of which being a AP champions going tank or non-supports going support, Fizz, Katarina, Annie, Zyra amongst others; not trying to be sarcastic but it would appear base damage is really hard to balance. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On June 02 2016 23:20 Jek wrote: It's a bit interesting just how much of a succes dynamic queue's role picking was since people are throwing fits about autofill now. Personally I think the proposed Lucian change is bloody stupid, it smells like "hey you found a new way to play champion X, that's not how we wanted so go fuck youself" - yeah I'm exaggerating but meh. Riot have done it before with multiple other champions most of which being a AP champions going tank or non-supports going support, Fizz, Katarina, Annie, Zyra amongst others; not trying to be sarcastic but it would appear base damage is really hard to balance. It also comes with the assumptions of other statistics at the time. There was no way to know on creation that down the line he'd have another 10 flat pen and 5%/stack up to 6 times armor reduction on his shit, plus 30-40% CDR depending on his core. It's just a change from the conceits at the time. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
Jungle clear isn't really effected. Same clear times and speeds early, no real change basically down to the auto except on buff camps and gromp which require one extra fade away auto attack. E nerf sucks, but I don't think the smaller micro slow really stops her from doing what she wants to do early game anyway. She is still a monster inside her W and can chase over walls for scatter kills. Q is doing slightly less damage unless you already snowballed out of control. I'll have to play a few more games with her, but after the first two she feels about the same. Would be nice if she was banned less though. I'd even like it if she was theoretically on the weaker side, if it made people quit banning her. She is fun, imo. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On June 02 2016 23:20 Jek wrote: It's a bit interesting just how much of a succes dynamic queue's role picking was since people are throwing fits about autofill now. Dynamic queue =/= new champion select. Either one could have been implemented individually, and they have horrid counter-synergy. It's vastly easier to build an algorithm to match solos with two picked roles than match a hodgepodge of group sizes up to 4 with picked roles to create an even game, and it's also (obviously) vastly easier to match groups together to make even games if you don't care about roles. That's probably a big part of why their models and predictions were so off. These two things have an unpredictable and interactive effect on queue times and matchmaking fidelity. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On June 02 2016 23:20 Jek wrote: It's a bit interesting just how much of a succes dynamic queue's role picking was since people are throwing fits about autofill now. . Isn't it like, "whats the point" of role-specific queue is a significant %of the time you don't get it? Why not just go back to pick order based on MMR ? | ||
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On June 03 2016 00:18 TheTenthDoc wrote: Dynamic queue =/= new champion select. Either one could have been implemented individually, and they have horrid counter-synergy. It's vastly easier to build an algorithm to match solos with two picked roles than match a hodgepodge of group sizes up to 4 with picked roles to create an even game, and it's also (obviously) vastly easier to match groups together to make even games if you don't care about roles. That's probably a big part of why their models and predictions were so off. These two things have an unpredictable and interactive effect on queue times and matchmaking fidelity. This is a great point. It's not just that people are confusing the two, it's that they actively work against each other. Looking forward to even more Reddit salt though and threats to quit for Overwatch. "I'm so mad about dynamic queue I'm going to go play a totally different game with dynamic queue!" | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
Dynamic Queue has been considered a failure in a number of games prior to LoL, and was something that the community was very opposed to from day 1. On the other hand, people had been clamoring for a role select for years. Was something universally considered to be something that would improve the game. By making them the same thing in most players eyes it makes it a trade off. Instead of "hey I hate this dynamic queue, give me soloqueue!" it is "man, dynamic queue sucks but at least I can always play my best roles." On June 03 2016 01:20 GrandInquisitor wrote: This is a great point. It's not just that people are confusing the two, it's that they actively work against each other. Looking forward to even more Reddit salt though and threats to quit for Overwatch. "I'm so mad about dynamic queue I'm going to go play a totally different game with dynamic queue!" I thought Blizz confirmed Overwatch was to have pure solo and 6v6 ranked play and just Dynamic Queue in quick play? I've been told they are removing Dynamic Queue from HotS ranked games. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
On June 03 2016 01:06 JimmiC wrote: 4: Riot is not a Bond Villian, they have no super secret agenda. They are a company who makes it's money off in game purchases. Therefor they wanted as many committed people playing as they can. They make changes based on keeping the game popular and getting people more committed and spending more. They may not get it right every single time but that is the agenda. Which alienates part of their playerbase because it grew so large it's not as uniform as it was during s2. And most people here and on reddit don't represent the largest chunk of said playerbase which is targeted by these changes. Hence all the complaints. I've said it over and over again, but Riot's shitting on part of their playerbase because number-wise they can afford it, and because players are also weighted by how much income they can provide and not how "loyal" or competitive they are. This isn't season 2 or even season 3 LoL anymore, and I'm not talking about gameplay. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On June 03 2016 01:10 cLutZ wrote: Isn't it like, "whats the point" of role-specific queue is a significant %of the time you don't get it? Why not just go back to pick order based on MMR ? It was never pick order based on MMR. The closest Riot never made that stance other than "Yeah, that way but be nice to your teammates." | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
The players that were the most enthusiastic about LoL were the ones that drew others to the game via word of mouth, and early on what with the barrier of entry and stuff these were mostly "hardcore" (the "" are important, these labels got dumb) gamers used to these kind of mechanics and barriers, eg. a more competitive crowd. They don't have as much to spend anymore, they're not as numerous as the "casuals" which Riot has found a way to get to, and they've done their job of providing visibility. They aren't needed anymore, and a fresh player is worth more than them even if he's not enfranchised simply because with the way the game's changed (especially mystery gifts) he'll bring in a ton more money, even if he leaves in 6 months. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On June 03 2016 01:56 Gahlo wrote: It was never pick order based on MMR. The closest Riot never made that stance other than "Yeah, that way but be nice to your teammates." Yea, and that was one of the reasons they had to make the anti-toxicity measures, because they willfully blinded themselves to the fact that most problems started in champ select. | ||
| ||
