|
United States37500 Posts
Welcome to this patch's General Discussion thread for the League of Legends subforum. This thread is for discussion around League of Legends. Free feel to talk about anything LoL related here that does not already have its own thread.
Non-League of Legends discussion should go in the LiquidLegends Lounge.
Certain topics are blacklisted from LoL General Discussion and they include:- "Elo hell"
- The Tribunal
- Bans, either from TL.net or LoL
Additionally, the TL LoL Ten Commandments are available for you to reference if you have any questions about this subforum.
Use the LoL Strategy subforum if you have game or champion specific questions. Lastly, confine QQing and bragging to their respective threads.
Kled, the Cantankerous Cavalier, will be released in this patch!
Patch 6.16: Live on Aug. 10th, 2016
+ Show Spoiler [Previous GD Threads & Patch Notes] +
|
I was hoping they would nerf Irelia's laning because I'm pretty sure that's the reason why her banrate is so high
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
That Nautilus buff is pretty freakin' huge. It essentially doubles the CC lategame, and forces the other team to part like the red sea lest they be hit as well.
|
On August 10 2016 06:55 GrandInquisitor wrote:
That Nautilus buff is pretty freakin' huge. It essentially doubles the CC lategame, and forces the other team to part like the red sea lest they be hit as well.
That change makes a massive difference to depth charge. The previous knockup was 0.5s, and pretty negligible.
Change makes it an absolutely insane point and click initiation skill.
|
|
|
Man, such a big buff to Naut is giving me the itch for the first time in at least a month.
|
|
|
|
|
Not that bad of a nerf on Irelia, she still gets tenacity from mercs and the mastery
|
|
|
That Diana buff, holy shit.
|
|
|
On August 10 2016 10:31 JimmiC wrote:
The last few times I've logged on I've had the some one you reported has been punished message. I have no increased my reporting but it seems like this is way more frequent. Has riot started punishing more?
I heard that you get that message only when your report was the last report needed to trigger the punishment.
|
whats this irelia issue people been having? not seeing her at all.
|
Finally a nerf to Gangplank's stupid ult, global Rumble ult levels of damage was so fucking stupid.
On August 10 2016 20:47 MuddyJam wrote:
whats this irelia issue people been having? not seeing her at all.
She's one of the most banned champions, so that's probably why. Guess it's because people loathe laning vs her or have seen one snowball out of control.
|
|
|
On August 10 2016 21:45 MuddyJam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2016 20:52 Jek wrote:Finally a nerf to Gangplank's stupid ult, global Rumble ult levels of damage was so fucking stupid. On August 10 2016 20:47 MuddyJam wrote:
whats this irelia issue people been having? not seeing her at all. She's one of the most banned champions, so that's probably why. Guess it's because people loathe laning vs her or have seen one snowball out of control. her win rate isn't even good though (by that i mean not clear op)... like people just ban whatever these days which is why highest bans include yasuo/zed/ryze even though if your vs them its generally a free win. And illoai is up there because she takes effort to lane vs
|
I ban her because it lets me pick weaker laners without having to worry about getting bullied by a champion that doesn't fall off hard later. Not saying she's op but there were no must-ban champions on 6.15 so banning her didn't feel like wasting a ban.
|
that Gragas ult nerf is pretty strong, flash bodyslam not nearly as scary
|
my game says auto fill is enabled now for normal drafts
what the fuck
|
On August 11 2016 02:31 Slusher wrote:
that Gragas ult nerf is pretty strong, flash bodyslam not nearly as scary
?
"CTRL F" Gragas, Barrel, etc not found
|
referring to the pbe discussion on page 1, I'm guessing you are looking thru the patch notes.
Explosive Cask (R) now has a fixed travel time
"Also Gragas has a fixed travel time on his ult on PBE. This means when you point blank it, you see the barrel lob up for 0.55 seconds."**
|
Eww. Gragas's kit is slow enough as it is.
|
Kled feels overtuned to me. I suppose he doesn't have much to do other than autoattack, but considering how high his base health is with his mount (over 3000 at level 18), and how much mobility he has with his dash/ult, it feels pretty ridiculous. I suppose the inability to dash through walls and how he generates fury to get his mount back combined with his awful speed dismounted could both make him pretty miserable if he falls behind though.
He feels like a champion that can get ahead and just run down your entire team 1v1 though.
|
On August 11 2016 03:57 cLutZ wrote:
Eww. Gragas's kit is slow enough as it is.
Well currently if you don't know his flash is down you have to flash if he is in flash+e range or suffer non-interactive death. If this change goes live you can hold flash and trade flashes, but you are likly still dead if he has flash and you don't.
It could be ok I'll have to see how it feels .
|
considering gragas kit was originally a mid then became a top/jungle and saw some play support I think the kit ijust too good :/
also getting project yasuo with ip feels goood :D
|
Mid was actually a player innovation, i think pre rework was intended as a bruiser, hence the ad ratios / steroid
|
On August 11 2016 05:42 Slusher wrote:
Mid was actually a player innovation, i think pre rework was intended as a bruiser, hence the ad ratios / steroid
pre rework was a mess. i remember everyone though of him as trash until they started building locket on him. then locket was removed and they started building HoGs then those were removed and they started playing him full AP cause of shushei
|
That may all be true, but his Q and W are already slow. He's not really a high damage character (even if Q/W/E/R were if he built glass cannon he couldn't really hit targets with it because of the "charge up" on Q), hes an initiator that is flash-reliant like Shen. If he can make favorable flash trades by tricking people...thats kinda the point of his character right now.
I think he probably will be fine because of how healthy he is clearing and that E>Flash is decent on its own, but the kit is incredibly clunky already, adding more slowness is not how I'd do it.
|
another champion with global sound effect, this shit is tilting me -.-
|
Today I got 287 cs on support Zilean in a 66 minute game, pretty much everything from Banner and Zz'rot (gotta afk-control dem sidelanes). Ruby Sightstone is flippin' awesome. Didn't realize just how silly Ruby's passive scales if you build nothing but items with actives after it.
|
I didn't even know Ruby Sighstone had a passive, thank you
|
On August 11 2016 07:41 Sent. wrote:
I didn't even know Ruby Sighstone had a passive, thank you
At first I didn't think the 20% would be that much of a difference, but holy moly you can feel it when you start stacking up on actives. Dont think I'll ever build any of the other Sightstones unless it get nerfed/the others get buffed.
|
On August 11 2016 05:42 Slusher wrote:
Mid was actually a player innovation, i think pre rework was intended as a bruiser, hence the ad ratios / steroid
What? Mid was the standard, because 1.9 or 2 AP ratio on an instant combo happens to be pretty good when you get like 400 AP and start bashing squishies.
Gragas was one of the main benefitters from broken DFG; Dash -> DFG-QR and boom you're dead and rest of the team scattered (and half health).
|
You aren't wrong, but that doesn't disagree with my post you quoted in any way
|
Oh, yeah, I read "player innovation" as "it was played x way then y player showed up and changed everything" rather than "Riot intended x but players used it as y anyway."
|
Pre-Rework Gragas was OP, but I liked the kit better overall because the new W is clunky and the old Q was great. Imo there was a way to balance him, plus he was a utility melle mage, a character that doesn't exist anymore.
New Gragas is sometimes OP as well, but he's just a not-user-freindly version of old Gragas and not original. Just is a Maokai/Ekko/Sejuani style AP Bruiser instead. His old kit was probably 3rd behind Ori and Jarvan as the most interesting and useful kits.
|
Anyone tried support Lulu since the buffs? I played her one game, and her early game felt pretty terrible, but that W is pretty beast mid/late. In most cases though, feels like I'd rather just be Karma.
|
On August 11 2016 18:49 GolemMadness wrote:
Anyone tried support Lulu since the buffs? I played her one game, and her early game felt pretty terrible, but that W is pretty beast mid/late. In most cases though, feels like I'd rather just be Karma.
Tried her a few times and she felt ok, the nerf to piercing Q hurts the laning a lot. Picked her when we had multiple people she synergize very well with aka Rengar+heavy autoattack based adc (and hopefully one more), even on the low budget she can turn a Kog'Maw pretty beastly thanks to the Censor/Rageblade for more on-hit effects and his raw rate of attacks to additionally proc Pix bolts (Pix is on-attack so sadly no Rageblade synergy).
Think she's a "never leave your adc" kinda support, which is something ala Janna feels far better at but Lulu do have quite a bit more flexibility going for her. With a small buff to her base shield values (and/or Pix change into on-hit) I'm think she'd be in a fine spot as support.
EDIT: Actually JK on the Pix to on-hit, it'd make it spam proc from Hurricane so maybe make it scale from her AP instead of the buffed which again could be broken on solo Lulu. Meh. She's a wonky champion that's either super strong as a lane (good AP ratios) or as a support (high base values).
|
I thought Kled would get his fury when he attacked big jungle monsters/killed jungle monsters. The fact that he doesn't is hilariously bad for his early clear. With that in mind, he kind of seems like a super poor man's Master Yi in some respects. Maybe I'm overlooking how strong he would be with some tank items, but I don't know...
|
|
|
On August 12 2016 04:18 zer0das wrote:
I thought Kled would get his fury when he attacked big jungle monsters/killed jungle monsters. The fact that he doesn't is hilariously bad for his early clear. With that in mind, he kind of seems like a super poor man's Master Yi in some respects. Maybe I'm overlooking how strong he would be with some tank items, but I don't know...
Well he can reset his shield from fighting. And his shield is the entirety of his bonus HP from items. So he can potentially get very tanky if he can generate rage.
|
kled seems shitty unless u build him straight damage from what I have seen. It's absurd how slow he generates rage compared to gnar.
|
Riot hates fun junglers.
Literally all of them. Lol.
I think they have a problem with jungle being able to hard carry, and they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground, or make them shells that anyone can play. Gob forbid there are mechanically challenging junglers to play.
Must change Nidalee because retards can't auto attack reset or cancel and therefore die to the jungle... to me that is basically nerfing master yi because some people don't cast Q. Like why... they had already balanced her.
None of the junglers feel rewarding to play. Lee sin I guess but I don't like how he limits your win conditions.
|
Or like the time they nerfed kindred just because the junglers that played kindred were all more skilled than junglers that played other champs.
|
Nidalee's clear speed is too fast. Jungle clear speed is a major defect in Riot's balancing scheme.
|
On August 12 2016 23:49 General_Winter wrote:
Or like the time they nerfed kindred just because the junglers that played kindred were all more skilled than junglers that played other champs.
they nerfed her cuz she scaled to vayne tier hyper carry late game with renekton early game dmg on top of insane team fight utility ult, champ design is busted
|
Yeah. There was some sarcasm in my comment.
Honestly I'd be happy with the early game pressure and late game hyper carry. No need for the utility ult, pre nerf kindred would have been just fine with a blank r button.
|
On August 13 2016 22:13 General_Winter wrote:
Yeah. There was some sarcasm in my comment.
Honestly I'd be happy with the early game pressure and late game hyper carry. No need for the utility ult, pre nerf kindred would have been just fine with a blank r button.
Nah, the damage was just too insane and easy to pull off. You could walk into any lane at any point of the game and 3shot the laner. You got 3 Qs off within 5sec, if you failed or overextend backing out was just as easy as the gank. Not to mention the dumbass slow that would keep them in range just long enough to get ur Qs off. And why wouldn't you add %hp dmg on that if you had built in %hp dmg on the autos? Let's not even start with that ultimate.
|
I find the Kled ulti way to overpowered.
It's a Sivir ult on steroids with cc. Actually ridiculous.
|
On August 12 2016 08:40 iCanada wrote:
... they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground...
It's funny because on the other end I see people complaining that they're removing "point and click" champions by updating their kits to require more skill-shots.
I think it's just really hard to balance High Skill Cap Champs because it's really hard to predict exactly how well the potential of the champion will be utilized by the players.
Balancing 100+ champions isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do without making them fighting-game-styled cookie-cutouts of each other.
|
On August 14 2016 04:49 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2016 08:40 iCanada wrote:
... they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground...
It's funny because on the other end I see people complaining that they're removing "point and click" champions by updating their kits to require more skill-shots. I think it's just really hard to balance High Skill Cap Champs because it's really hard to predict exactly how well the potential of the champion will be utilized by the players. Balancing 100+ champions isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do without making them fighting-game-styled cookie-cutouts of each other.
Adding skill shots to everything is boring, there are other ways to have 'high skill' champions.
|
On August 14 2016 09:41 Ansibled wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2016 04:49 Nemireck wrote:On August 12 2016 08:40 iCanada wrote:
... they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground...
It's funny because on the other end I see people complaining that they're removing "point and click" champions by updating their kits to require more skill-shots. I think it's just really hard to balance High Skill Cap Champs because it's really hard to predict exactly how well the potential of the champion will be utilized by the players. Balancing 100+ champions isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do without making them fighting-game-styled cookie-cutouts of each other. Adding skill shots to everything is boring, there are other ways to have 'high skill' champions.
especially since point and click exists as a counterweight to hypermobility.
|
I miss point and click Zilean. 
|
On August 14 2016 04:49 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2016 08:40 iCanada wrote:
... they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground...
It's funny because on the other end I see people complaining that they're removing "point and click" champions by updating their kits to require more skill-shots. I think it's just really hard to balance High Skill Cap Champs because it's really hard to predict exactly how well the potential of the champion will be utilized by the players. Balancing 100+ champions isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do without making them fighting-game-styled cookie-cutouts of each other.
The problem is riot is trying to balance shit for both competitive and casuals. It really isn't that hard to predict the potential of the champion. They just can't accept that in order for said champion to work in competitive and not be p/b every game it has to be close to unplayable for 95% of the playerbase.
|
If all champions are 95% unplayable for the majority of the playerbase, all champions are viable for the entire playerbase. :^)
|
I just...
Why does it matter if Mr Wood 5 can't play Nidalee properly?
Perhaps if they want to play nidalee they can practice reseting their auto attacks and animation canceling for 5 minutes
|
On August 15 2016 05:00 iCanada wrote:
I just...
Why does it matter if Mr Wood 5 can't play Nidalee properly?
Perhaps if they want to play nidalee they can practice reseting their auto attacks and animation canceling for 5 minutes
bc wood 5 buys the skins. Yasuo pick rate in bronze is really high! Gotta get the big bucks $$$
also cant people stop equating skillshots with skill? Yasuo has no real skillshots and is one of hardest champs in the game mechanically. Shaco has no skillshots and very high skill cap. Twisted fate difficultly is not about you hitting your Q. I could list more vayne/twitch/riven.
@nafta
lee sin was out and played heavily for years and nobody found out how to insec. Same with nidalee took a long time to see her kit is fantastic for jungle.
|
|
|
On August 14 2016 20:38 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2016 04:49 Nemireck wrote:On August 12 2016 08:40 iCanada wrote:
... they also hate high skill cap Champs. So they nerf them into the ground...
It's funny because on the other end I see people complaining that they're removing "point and click" champions by updating their kits to require more skill-shots. I think it's just really hard to balance High Skill Cap Champs because it's really hard to predict exactly how well the potential of the champion will be utilized by the players. Balancing 100+ champions isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do without making them fighting-game-styled cookie-cutouts of each other. The problem is riot is trying to balance shit for both competitive and casuals. It really isn't that hard to predict the potential of the champion. They just can't accept that in order for said champion to work in competitive and not be p/b every game it has to be close to unplayable for 95% of the playerbase.
Its not even point and click vs. Skillshot that is the main problem for this (even if it is a part). It is hard initiation vs. kiting. AOE CC like malphite, sejuani, amumu, ZAC, etc just never lasts in pro play for long because if it works against people good enough to play Azir it wrecks people who can barely play Annie.
|
What are people's thoughts on Kled now he has been out some time?
|
On August 15 2016 18:27 Jek wrote:
What are people's thoughts on Kled now he has been out some time?
I haven't yet lost to one so he probably isn't very good, but he does tons of obnoxious shit that makes you hate the game.
The part where Kled ignores dmg greater than what would dismount him is super dumb.
|
His ultimate have been really strong in the games I've had with, but asides from the huge damage from his W and utility on R the kit is sorta meh. Cant really figure out what you want to build on him, he want enough speed to stick on his target, AD, HP, CDR and resists (especially for unmounted). Sort of all over the place.
Think it's a bit too hard to resummon dragonpony, maybe 20 rage instead of 15 (per auto). Ugh, I dunno.
He can setup up some pretty silly dives since he autodrops aggro when he dismounts.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
I feel like every new champion Riot has released recently has been underpowered at launch until they get buffed into viability. It's a little weird.
|
On August 15 2016 05:00 iCanada wrote:
I just...
Why does it matter if Mr Wood 5 can't play Nidalee properly?
Perhaps if they want to play nidalee they can practice reseting their auto attacks and animation canceling for 5 minutes
I tried. I realized it was far enough above my skill level to care. I honestly doubt most people actually practice this though and just bitch/complain about not being able to clear like the pros (or their jungler not being able to) and losing because of that. When in reality they, like me, lose because they're bad and make fucking terrible decisions.
|
On August 15 2016 18:27 Jek wrote:
What are people's thoughts on Kled now he has been out some time?
Mediocre at best. His ult seems strong, rest of his kit is meh. You need to build tank and damage so I am imagining riot will over buff his damage and tankiness in like 2 patches and then nerf him back out of the game.
|
I feel like every new champion Riot has released recently has been underpowered at launch until they get buffed into viability. It's a little weird.
I consider that a good thing, no more things like release Xin. On the other hand, I would consider their reworks to be quite the opposite, they tend to make the champion a strong pick and they tend to get nerfed. Look at Juggernauts, look at Sion rework, look at Ashe, Anivia, Poppy, Malz, Cass, Vlad etc. All those champions have either seen hefty nerfs, or are part of the current meta. Only champion I feel Riot did a real job with making viable but not OP was Taric.
All "carry" champs have high pick rates in bronze cause it's their bad teammates keeping em down not there own play. Elo hell is real! Am i rite?
People play them because they feel they can carry best with them, what's wrong with that?
|
I think the "issue" is that reworked champs tend to have less bugs (not 100% sure, seems like it to me though) than new ones so even if we suppose they are always balanced with a similar criteria the new ones often end up weaker but get stronger while that's not really true with reworked ones.
|
IMO reworked champs are overtuned because Riot needs an excuse to do the rework and doesn't want to piss off fans of that champ. Take, for instance, Vlad. He was nerfed before the rework for a reason: Riot is not a huge fan of sustain. They could always have made him meta by simply buffing him. Hemoplauge has always been a beastly teamfighting move, Vlad in general was always a beast at doing damage, and he was a wall once he hit a breakpoint. New Vlad basically does most of those same things, plus protobelt. The only justification to give Vlad-fans for the rework is "he's powerful now, our rework is successful". If a reworked champion still sucks, you've pissed off people immediately.
|
|
|
kled is very good. I don't think he needs any more buffs. I expect him to be played come worlds if he's activated then.
his ult is just retarded, he has a very high damage-survivability ratio, and he is a good to excellent duelist that scales well. pretty much perfect for this meta.
really liked a bc/sunfire/deathsdance build that I saw. probably don't need the sunfire? but really liked the death's dance. makes him pretty obnoxious
|
United States37500 Posts
DD is pretty underrated for a lot of Top Lane champs.
|
Yeah chalk me up in the "Kled is good" category. In almost every game I've played with one the Kled has done well or downright hard carried. There's probably a bit of people not knowing how to play against him tbf.
|
On August 16 2016 01:50 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 05:00 iCanada wrote:
I just...
Why does it matter if Mr Wood 5 can't play Nidalee properly?
Perhaps if they want to play nidalee they can practice reseting their auto attacks and animation canceling for 5 minutes I tried. I realized it was far enough above my skill level to care. I honestly doubt most people actually practice this though and just bitch/complain about not being able to clear like the pros (or their jungler not being able to) and losing because of that. When in reality they, like me, lose because they're bad and make fucking terrible decisions.
But it isn't hard...
If you can last it you could auto R auto too. You could animation cancel autos too.
5 minutes of YouTube work and maybe an hour of custom game time.
Nidalee combos honestly are way easier than Lee Sin combos. Hell it is easier than driving a manual transmission or playing piano at the level of the average 12 year old.
|
On a different tangent, that naut ult buff is absolutely insane. Lategame the cc changes from negligible on secondary targets to wtf why you flash back and drag ulti through team. It's so incredibly disruptive it's unreal.
|
|
|
Honestly, I think its long overdue. We might actually need 12 at this point.
|
Hopefully champion select isn't going to take 20 minutes though.
|
On August 19 2016 04:58 Ansibled wrote:
Hopefully champion select isn't going to take 20 minutes though.
We feel champ select’s too long already. We’d want to find ways to not increase its duration further as a result (e.g. multiple people from the same team banning at the same time?).
that sounds good
|
Yeah. I like ten bans but everyone bans at once. Speeds up te process and let's everyone look out for their own needs without having to beg in chat.
|
more bans is fine as long as you can ban multiple ones at the same time so you don't spend 25 minutes doing the ban phase
|
|
|
ye nobody will ever be able to play zed or yasuo in ranked
|
On August 19 2016 07:23 kongoline wrote:
ye nobody will ever be able to play zed or yasuo in ranked
and thank God for that. No more being victim to The Zed-Yasuo Theorem,
"if Yasuo or Zed are on your team they solve world hunger if not they become obsese".
|
I'm worried about Lee Sin one trick ponies, what will they do with their lives?
|
guess all 1 tricks in higer elo will be fucked by this change
|
On August 19 2016 08:32 kongoline wrote:
guess all 1 tricks in higer elo will be fucked by this change
Which is good.
|
On August 19 2016 14:27 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2016 08:32 kongoline wrote:
guess all 1 tricks in higer elo will be fucked by this change Which is good.
Why do you think that's good?
|
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main'
|
4 more bans isnt going to end one trick ponies
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
No, but it will severely curtail anyone who OTP's vaguely meta champions. Yorick OTP's are safe, but I'm thinking Fizz, Yasuo, Rengar OTP's will be dodging just about every other game.
|
On August 19 2016 19:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main'
Nobody plays every champion at a consistent level.
|
Well I understand the need for speed, adding pre draft bans is more bad than good.
Hopefully they implement a dota style draft for pros and go back to 6 in solo
|
Less relevant for competitive or high Elo. But 10 bans is more bans than are needed to take care of broken champs. With ten bans maybe 4 get spent on OP champs 3 on lane matchups and 3 bans are left over to just waste on champs that are not really powerful but that no one really wants to play against. I look forward to a teemo free future.
|
On August 19 2016 22:23 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2016 19:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main' Nobody plays every champion at a consistent level.
Kind of irrelevant. The game works better if people have 3-4 champs at whatever role they play that are similar or replacement level. Not just bans, but so you don't get those yahoos that pick yasuo into everything.
|
On August 20 2016 01:43 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2016 22:23 Gahlo wrote:On August 19 2016 19:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main' Nobody plays every champion at a consistent level. Kind of irrelevant. The game works better if people have 3-4 champs at whatever role they play that are similar or replacement level. Not just bans, but so you don't get those yahoos that pick yasuo into everything.
Gonna need more than 3-4 when there's 10 bans.
|
If 10 bans happen to hit your champion pool, then either your pool is entirely consisting of meta champs (which means you probably have other picks from a previous meta you are decent at), or its all at your role, in which case your opponent should be fucked as well.
|
Hope we can get a "ban all adcs" meta.
|
Consider that Dota 2 has something like 111 heroes playable right now, with another one coming out soon, and they showed off development at the latest TI. Compared to League, which has 132 champions right now, with it likely for us to see another one or two come out by the time the increased ban numbers would come out.
The biggest difference though is that Dota 2 heroes have more power in them and can flex into multiple roles, compared to League that has pretty well defined roles in every lane. I mean, it is entirely possible right now that both sides ban out almost every single ADC in the game, leaving only the poor meta choices left. Riot's going to need to make the League champs stronger to promote more diversity in the meta. TI's meta was pretty wide open, as they had like 107 out of 111 heroes played during the course of the tournament. Compared to League right now, where you're looking at like 20-30 champions at most that are meta-viable.
|
Hopefully champ select is better when they focus on improving the ranked play experience. I'm not too concerned about the number of bans, because there is quite a lot of depth to the available champions now with a lot of strong/annoying champs but not that many "must-bans"
However, champ select for my games at ~gold takes up to 20 minutes sometimes between queue times and people dodging out, and even after this system has been out for a while people are still missing bans or failing to lock in. If they don't make other workflow changes, just increasing the number of bans now to 1 per player is going to make it take forever.
|
I look forward to never having to play against or with Pd/frozen mallet yasuo again
|
|
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On August 20 2016 04:05 Kinie wrote:
TI's meta was pretty wide open, as they had like 107 out of 111 heroes played during the course of the tournament. Compared to League right now, where you're looking at like 20-30 champions at most that are meta-viable.
Ehhh. Dota2 has more bans and snaked bans, which obviously boosts diversity. But TI6 is not a great comparison. There were a ton of shitty picks that were never serious picks (Pudge) - by comparison the finals had way, way less diversity.
Plus it's also way more games. Worlds season 5 had ~70 games and TI6 had almost 200?
|
On August 16 2016 05:42 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:16 DarkCore wrote:I feel like every new champion Riot has released recently has been underpowered at launch until they get buffed into viability. It's a little weird. I consider that a good thing, no more things like release Xin. On the other hand, I would consider their reworks to be quite the opposite, they tend to make the champion a strong pick and they tend to get nerfed. Look at Juggernauts, look at Sion rework, look at Ashe, Anivia, Poppy, Malz, Cass, Vlad etc. All those champions have either seen hefty nerfs, or are part of the current meta. Only champion I feel Riot did a real job with making viable but not OP was Taric. All "carry" champs have high pick rates in bronze cause it's their bad teammates keeping em down not there own play. Elo hell is real! Am i rite? People play them because they feel they can carry best with them, what's wrong with that? No real problem with it. Just that the mindset is wrong. To win the game you need to take the most objectives, work together so on more then "get a bunch o kills" People would move up faster if they learned those skills instead of thinking everyone in their games is so much worse then them and they need to "carry" it is FAR FAR more likely that everyone in there game is equally bad just in different ways. That being said if they have fun trying to carry and are not mad at not moving up all the power to them.
That mindset is wrong in higher elo but definitely in low elo you need to carry your team if you want to win, they seriously don't know what to do even when they have a bunch of objectives.
|
On August 20 2016 07:29 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2016 04:05 Kinie wrote:
TI's meta was pretty wide open, as they had like 107 out of 111 heroes played during the course of the tournament. Compared to League right now, where you're looking at like 20-30 champions at most that are meta-viable. Ehhh. Dota2 has more bans and snaked bans, which obviously boosts diversity. But TI6 is not a great comparison. There were a ton of shitty picks that were never serious picks (Pudge) - by comparison the finals had way, way less diversity. Plus it's also way more games. Worlds season 5 had ~70 games and TI6 had almost 200?
Crucially the modes in dota where the bans are not snaked there aren't 10 bans. League could benefit from more bans but front loaded bans are not an improvement. In soloqueue I'd rather stick to 6 if people don't want to waste even more time drafting.
|
On August 20 2016 07:29 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2016 04:05 Kinie wrote:
TI's meta was pretty wide open, as they had like 107 out of 111 heroes played during the course of the tournament. Compared to League right now, where you're looking at like 20-30 champions at most that are meta-viable. Ehhh. Dota2 has more bans and snaked bans, which obviously boosts diversity. But TI6 is not a great comparison. There were a ton of shitty picks that were never serious picks (Pudge) - by comparison the finals had way, way less diversity. Plus it's also way more games. Worlds season 5 had ~70 games and TI6 had almost 200?
There was a pudge pick in LB finals I think...
|
|
|
On August 20 2016 09:29 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2016 07:34 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On August 16 2016 05:42 JimmiC wrote:On August 16 2016 03:16 DarkCore wrote:I feel like every new champion Riot has released recently has been underpowered at launch until they get buffed into viability. It's a little weird. I consider that a good thing, no more things like release Xin. On the other hand, I would consider their reworks to be quite the opposite, they tend to make the champion a strong pick and they tend to get nerfed. Look at Juggernauts, look at Sion rework, look at Ashe, Anivia, Poppy, Malz, Cass, Vlad etc. All those champions have either seen hefty nerfs, or are part of the current meta. Only champion I feel Riot did a real job with making viable but not OP was Taric. All "carry" champs have high pick rates in bronze cause it's their bad teammates keeping em down not there own play. Elo hell is real! Am i rite? People play them because they feel they can carry best with them, what's wrong with that? No real problem with it. Just that the mindset is wrong. To win the game you need to take the most objectives, work together so on more then "get a bunch o kills" People would move up faster if they learned those skills instead of thinking everyone in their games is so much worse then them and they need to "carry" it is FAR FAR more likely that everyone in there game is equally bad just in different ways. That being said if they have fun trying to carry and are not mad at not moving up all the power to them. That mindset is wrong in higher elo but definitely in low elo you need to carry your team if you want to win, they seriously don't know what to do even when they have a bunch of objectives. I disagree you play the same as high Elo you just ping lots and try to convince people to follow you. The better your score the easier it is but regardless you can carry by getting them to work together with as much success as picking whoever and trying to 1 v 5
idk honestly in low elo i just go off killing anyone who comes close to me and rely on my team for nothing because i don't have to, i'm 20-0 on Fizz and their team can't do anything about it. I think that it's a mistake to assume that your team is capable of following basic directions and playing as a team because if they were they wouldn't be in low elo, so you might as well just carry it on raw kills, which has a secondary advantage in that low elo people get demoralized by someone who is clearly destroying the game by him/herself.
Imagine trying to coordinate a dive with low elo people--you definitely don't play the same at low and high elo.
BTW, here's that Fizz game I was talking about: + Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
On August 20 2016 08:21 Slusher wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2016 07:29 GrandInquisitor wrote:On August 20 2016 04:05 Kinie wrote:
TI's meta was pretty wide open, as they had like 107 out of 111 heroes played during the course of the tournament. Compared to League right now, where you're looking at like 20-30 champions at most that are meta-viable. Ehhh. Dota2 has more bans and snaked bans, which obviously boosts diversity. But TI6 is not a great comparison. There were a ton of shitty picks that were never serious picks (Pudge) - by comparison the finals had way, way less diversity. Plus it's also way more games. Worlds season 5 had ~70 games and TI6 had almost 200? Crucially the modes in dota where the bans are not snaked there aren't 10 bans. League could benefit from more bans but front loaded bans are not an improvement. In soloqueue I'd rather stick to 6 if people don't want to waste even more time drafting.
SoloQ bans:
>Top 3 of each team ban 1 each. 1M. Blind bans inter-squad, if duplicated, oh well.
> Top 3 of each team pick as before (with 4 of redside not yet picking).
> Bottom 2 Each team ban 1 each. Still blind, still oh well.
> Red4 Picks, Blue 4/5. Red 5 Pretty simple solution. Probably faster than currently.
GI: Looking at TI6 picks/bans I compared the TI Upper bracket/Lowerbracket finals + Grand finals to what has happened in LCK Summer so far:
TI6 UB+LB+GF
(3 Series)
3 Teams
9 Games
57 Heroes Picked/Banned
18 Picked but not banned (39 banned)
10 Banned but not picked (47 Played)
Most banned: Drow Ranger (9)
Most picked: Mirana (5)
4 Heroes Picked/Banned in all 9 games: Drow, Mirana, Elder Titan, Timbersaw
LCK Summer Playoffs 2016 (thus far)
(3 Series)
4 Teams
10 Games
35 Heros Picked/Banned
15 Picked but not banned (20 banned)
2 Banned but not picked (33 Picked)
Most banned: Taliah/Vladimir (6)
Most Picked: Ekko/Sivir/Tahm Kench (8)
1 Hero Picked/Banned in all games: Gragas
TLDR, KT/Rox need to pull out 12 unique picks for the entire LCK playoffs to match the last 3 series of TI in champs played in games.
|
it's really hard to compare them statistically like that when there are 4 additional heros per draft in the dota games.
|
Lack of champ variety is what's stopped me from following the league scene, so anything at all to help that is big plus in my book. Hopefully it works out.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On August 20 2016 11:41 cLutZ wrote:GI: Looking at TI6 picks/bans I compared the TI Upper bracket/Lowerbracket finals + Grand finals to what has happened in LCK Summer so far: Show nested quote +
TI6 UB+LB+GF
(3 Series)
3 Teams
9 Games
57 Heroes Picked/Banned
18 Picked but not banned (39 banned)
10 Banned but not picked (47 Played)
Most banned: Drow Ranger (9)
Most picked: Mirana (5)
4 Heroes Picked/Banned in all 9 games: Drow, Mirana, Elder Titan, Timbersaw
LCK Summer Playoffs 2016 (thus far)
(3 Series)
4 Teams
10 Games
35 Heros Picked/Banned
15 Picked but not banned (20 banned)
2 Banned but not picked (33 Picked)
Most banned: Taliah/Vladimir (6)
Most Picked: Ekko/Sivir/Tahm Kench (8)
1 Hero Picked/Banned in all games: Gragas
TLDR, KT/Rox need to pull out 12 unique picks for the entire LCK playoffs to match the last 3 series of TI in champs played in games.
Thanks. This is pretty interesting. If you restrict yourself to only picked (since obviously it's unfair to count banned) you get 47 heroes across 9 games? Compared to 33 champs in 10 games? That's a pretty small difference (equivalent to about 1-2 new champs per game) and I'm fine attributing that to snaked bans and more bans. A theory supported by the fact that you have 4 100% p/b instead of 1.
Personally I don't think Riot will snake bans. It's a good idea but doesn't seem like a League idea. I wonder if they're willing to do simultaneous bans, with double-banned champions just being a wasted ban. It would help address their fears of like 10 ADC bans.
|
On August 20 2016 13:44 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2016 11:41 cLutZ wrote:GI: Looking at TI6 picks/bans I compared the TI Upper bracket/Lowerbracket finals + Grand finals to what has happened in LCK Summer so far:
TI6 UB+LB+GF
(3 Series)
3 Teams
9 Games
57 Heroes Picked/Banned
18 Picked but not banned (39 banned)
10 Banned but not picked (47 Played)
Most banned: Drow Ranger (9)
Most picked: Mirana (5)
4 Heroes Picked/Banned in all 9 games: Drow, Mirana, Elder Titan, Timbersaw
LCK Summer Playoffs 2016 (thus far)
(3 Series)
4 Teams
10 Games
35 Heros Picked/Banned
15 Picked but not banned (20 banned)
2 Banned but not picked (33 Picked)
Most banned: Taliah/Vladimir (6)
Most Picked: Ekko/Sivir/Tahm Kench (8)
1 Hero Picked/Banned in all games: Gragas
TLDR, KT/Rox need to pull out 12 unique picks for the entire LCK playoffs to match the last 3 series of TI in champs played in games. Thanks. This is pretty interesting. If you restrict yourself to only picked (since obviously it's unfair to count banned) you get 47 heroes across 9 games? Compared to 33 champs in 10 games? That's a pretty small difference (equivalent to about 1-2 new champs per game) and I'm fine attributing that to snaked bans and more bans. A theory supported by the fact that you have 4 100% p/b instead of 1. Personally I don't think Riot will snake bans. It's a good idea but doesn't seem like a League idea. I wonder if they're willing to do simultaneous bans, with double-banned champions just being a wasted ban. It would help address their fears of like 10 ADC bans.
Well. #1 that proposal would just be for soloQ because that is much too long already. With voicecoms there is no reason LOL bans for pros cant be 30s apiece with a 1 min reserve time. IMO it just helps with the time issue, and it ensures anything that is "must ban" is banned in soloQ. I don't think it works for the LOL proscene because its simply too much mindgames for Blue side based on how many "must pick/ban" champs exist.
#2 I think snaked bans are a must if you want to really get the extra "pick" diversity in lol for a lot of the reasons we've talked about. Its no good banning Cassiopeia right away if shes a counter to your meta/semi meta midlane pick because that gives away the game. It certainly would increase League's raw pick/ban stats, but it wouldn't do what people are looking for, which is add flavor to the game.
#3. An interesting thing is that there were only 2 Banned, but not picked characters in League (TF and Nami), TF was a pocket pick in R1, and Nami was seemingly also random in R1. Neither was ever banned or picked again. Teams did not think they could afford the luxury of such bans against the strongest teams. Whereas there was one pick in DOTA (Drow) that no one wanted to face, and the rest seemed more like "pocket" or "comp" bans (sort of related to the last point of #2).
PS. Drow was a strong pick pre-last-three-matches in DOTA, but nowhere near the level of GP/Vlad in the LCK playoffs. These bans should be perma on the LCK patch.
|
Riot doesn't think and/or like games in league to be decided in P/B. Despite the reality that P/B matters a lot, they don't want to make it deeper or improve the end result on the game by adding complicated Pick/ban orders. Just adding bans to fit the champ pool size is a pretty far step.
Given the obviously negative effect this has on new players playing ranked (you need many more champs unlocked now) I wonder if it's a sign that many new accounts are just smurfs/for sale and not actually new players.And So riot doesn't particularly care that it hurts new players as much.
|
On August 20 2016 11:39 JimmiC wrote:
Could be if you have the skills to do that consistently. Most people don't and are better off trying to learn the right way to play then to "carry" if they could do that already they would be long out of bronze and silver. I was not meaning the fastest way to boost if that's what you thought
Except the right way to play is to generally be super passive and patient which takes more time to get good at while in solo going in like a retard 24/7 teaches you and works most of the time much better.
|
|
|
On August 19 2016 19:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main'
everyone and their mom got to high elo in the first place being an ezreal otp in season 1 or earlier
then you had a few randoms like dlift being a blitz 1 trick
dyrus had a relatively deep champion pool consistent of singed and jax
it's just objectively better to play a ladder on only 1 champion
|
On August 21 2016 22:29 Frolossus wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2016 19:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:
cause if youre a one trick pony in a higher elo you dont belong in that elo. you belong in the elo where you can play every other champion at.
otherwise youre just ruining the game for everyone else when you dont get your 'main' everyone and their mom got to high elo in the first place being an ezreal otp in season 1 or earlier then you had a few randoms like dlift being a blitz 1 trick dyrus had a relatively deep champion pool consistent of singed and jax it's just objectively better to play a ladder on only 1 champion
Which is bad game design. Which is why everyone says its good if they system makes the lives of OTPs harder.
|
How is it bad game design if you can climb the ladder by playing the champion you enjoy playing the most?
|
On August 22 2016 08:03 Prog wrote:
How is it bad game design if you can climb the ladder by playing the champion you enjoy playing the most?
It isn't. You've invested hours and hours learning the ins and outs of playing a champ, you should be able to beat most other champs by playing better. Sure, OTP's might eventually drop out at somewhere d1+, but it's not like the system doesn't work for OTP's before or after any pick/ban changes.
They might not climb as consistently due to less optimal role selection, but it isn't too bad otherwise.
|
On August 22 2016 08:03 Prog wrote:
How is it bad game design if you can climb the ladder by playing the champion you enjoy playing the most?
#1. Just as an existential point, ELO or MMR, or what league you are in is supposed to be indicative of your skill at the game. If you only play one champion, its not a reflection of that. This is a personal opinion, but its why I also liked the old system better than teambuilder, because I think people should be forced to play the role they hate the most, or are the worst at, in a ranked system.
#2. Probably the real point, is in this game your MMR is a weighted average of your skill on all the champions you play and if you are a 99 on one champ and a 25 on all the others, and thus your MMR is an 88, your presence in any game, no matter the champion you are on makes it a terrible playing environment. OTPs are, essentially, ELO boosters/smurfs in games they play the champion they want, and ELO buyers in games they do not.
|
For the sake of argument I'll accept in this post that MMR is a weighted average of your skill on all the champions you play:
1. Suppose I am a true OTP and I dodge whenever I don't get the champion. Then my MMR is a weighted average of 1 champion and a good representation of my skill.
2. Suppose I am a adc main. I am a 80 on all my various adc-champs and a 50 anywhere else. Then, following your argument, I am essentially an Elo booster whenever I get adc, and an Elo buyer in games I get my secondary role.
3. The dodging OTP is actually better for the game environment than the adc/fill player. The dodging OTP never plays something that he is not close to his rank (given enough games) in skill, whereas the adc/fill player is in principle unable to play in a game where his MMR matches his skill. Because he plays both adc and fill he will neither be rated according to his 80, nor 50, so he will always be over- or underrated for the game he is in.
4. Similarly a person that only plays adc and dodges whenever he'd be another role is closer in MMR to his skill.
The problem here is that you can match skill and MMR in two ways: You can either get equally good on all multiple champions you play, or you simply don't play the outliers - the champions that you are way worse or better at. You are not better for the game environment if you play more champions, but rather, if you only play those you play equally well. Plug in a OTP and your set of champions you play is trivially the set of champions you play equally well. Hence it might be a good idea to encourage people to play less champions, or even be OTPs, and certainly dodge more often.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On August 22 2016 10:49 cLutZ wrote:
#1. Just as an existential point, ELO or MMR, or what league you are in is supposed to be indicative of your skill at the game. If you only play one champion, its not a reflection of that. This is a personal opinion, but its why I also liked the old system better than teambuilder, because I think people should be forced to play the role they hate the most, or are the worst at, in a ranked system.
I find this argument seductive, but there are a few flaws. Chief among them is the idea that MMR is supposed to be a holistic measure of your skill with an arbitrary champion in an arbitrary lane is a nice one, but is your MMR supposed to reflect non-meta picks? For example does it contain some information about how you would fare at Janna jungle or Ahri ADC? If not, then that already implies some limiting factor on MMR.
In other words, by your logic, the One True MMR for all players is a queue where you are randomly assigned a champion + role. That's obviously unworkable. So then you say, well, the One True MMR is a queue where you are randomly assigned a role but not a champion. But then people just start favoring certain champions again - you could probably OTP Kayle in this system. So then the One True MMR is a queue where you're randomly assigned a role and then randomly assigned a champion from a set of meta champions for that role?
I agree with you that if you're a OTP you really are playing at an 'inflated' MMR, but only if you accept as true that your baseline MMR is a world where you're forced to play not your OTP. That world doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. Because otherwise even a hypothetically perfectly balanced player is playing an 'inflated' MMR because it doesn't take into account how he'd do on Janna jungle, whether he's up against OTP's on the other team, and the RNG of teamcomp building (for example is your MMR inflated if you pick Shaco jungle unless you OP.GG your adc and see he's a smurf and so you play Nunu? Is your MMR affected by your Zed mid main, forcing your top laner/jungler to go AP?).
|
|
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On August 23 2016 00:20 JimmiC wrote:
All this OTP talks makes me wanna OTP I'm thinking swain he goes top and mid does damamges and is tanky, plus some cc = GG
Go for it fam, OTP is one of the best ways to improve quickly, it is known.
Disregard skeptics, acquire skill
|
Prog has the right of it with regards to MMR and its effects.
Additionally OTP'ing can put you into positions to increase your strength in all roles, due to a better understanding of the structure of the game.
Players who play multiple roles and champions have to spend time learning the basics and structure of their individual champion and this detracts from being able to understand overall macro play. Because overall macro play is conductive to all champions skills but individual mechanics are not a player who plays a more specialized set may actually increase in skill for all champions at a higher rate.
|
Just as an aside for everyone. I agree that focusing on one character, or a small group is the best way to improve. It lets you put "mechanics" like CSing and trading to autopilot and you can focus on the rest. When I played mid more I just played Ori all the time because of that. Now that I play bot more I do the same with Ali/Janna. I don't argue against the tactic's efficacy.
On August 22 2016 23:09 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2016 10:49 cLutZ wrote:
#1. Just as an existential point, ELO or MMR, or what league you are in is supposed to be indicative of your skill at the game. If you only play one champion, its not a reflection of that. This is a personal opinion, but its why I also liked the old system better than teambuilder, because I think people should be forced to play the role they hate the most, or are the worst at, in a ranked system. I find this argument seductive, but there are a few flaws. Chief among them is the idea that MMR is supposed to be a holistic measure of your skill with an arbitrary champion in an arbitrary lane is a nice one, but is your MMR supposed to reflect non-meta picks? For example does it contain some information about how you would fare at Janna jungle or Ahri ADC? If not, then that already implies some limiting factor on MMR. In other words, by your logic, the One True MMR for all players is a queue where you are randomly assigned a champion + role. That's obviously unworkable. So then you say, well, the One True MMR is a queue where you are randomly assigned a role but not a champion. But then people just start favoring certain champions again - you could probably OTP Kayle in this system. So then the One True MMR is a queue where you're randomly assigned a role and then randomly assigned a champion from a set of meta champions for that role? I agree with you that if you're a OTP you really are playing at an 'inflated' MMR, but only if you accept as true that your baseline MMR is a world where you're forced to play not your OTP. That world doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. Because otherwise even a hypothetically perfectly balanced player is playing an 'inflated' MMR because it doesn't take into account how he'd do on Janna jungle, whether he's up against OTP's on the other team, and the RNG of teamcomp building (for example is your MMR inflated if you pick Shaco jungle unless you OP.GG your adc and see he's a smurf and so you play Nunu? Is your MMR affected by your Zed mid main, forcing your top laner/jungler to go AP?).
I am somewhat a fundamentalist, and find the random assignment of role + auto team construction by some sort of algorithm entirely workable and IMO that is the system that should give people ranked rewards. I don't think its unworkable, I think its AWESOME.
|
On August 22 2016 10:49 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2016 08:03 Prog wrote:
How is it bad game design if you can climb the ladder by playing the champion you enjoy playing the most? #1. Just as an existential point, ELO or MMR, or what league you are in is supposed to be indicative of your skill at the game. If you only play one champion, its not a reflection of that. This is a personal opinion, but its why I also liked the old system better than teambuilder, because I think people should be forced to play the role they hate the most, or are the worst at, in a ranked system. #2. Probably the real point, is in this game your MMR is a weighted average of your skill on all the champions you play and if you are a 99 on one champ and a 25 on all the others, and thus your MMR is an 88, your presence in any game, no matter the champion you are on makes it a terrible playing environment. OTPs are, essentially, ELO boosters/smurfs in games they play the champion they want, and ELO buyers in games they do not.
i think restricting what characters people can play in ranked in a way beyond bans is just gonna make them all quit the game.
professionally, people only play 1 role so i don't think it's fair to force people to play other roles if they don't want to.
|
^ Totally agree with that point, its not good business to do these things. Just saying, it would please me. I might even buy their 100% half-assed SKT skins if they did that.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On August 23 2016 04:43 cLutZ wrote:Just as an aside for everyone. I agree that focusing on one character, or a small group is the best way to improve. It lets you put "mechanics" like CSing and trading to autopilot and you can focus on the rest. When I played mid more I just played Ori all the time because of that. Now that I play bot more I do the same with Ali/Janna. I don't argue against the tactic's efficacy. Show nested quote +On August 22 2016 23:09 GrandInquisitor wrote:On August 22 2016 10:49 cLutZ wrote:
#1. Just as an existential point, ELO or MMR, or what league you are in is supposed to be indicative of your skill at the game. If you only play one champion, its not a reflection of that. This is a personal opinion, but its why I also liked the old system better than teambuilder, because I think people should be forced to play the role they hate the most, or are the worst at, in a ranked system. I find this argument seductive, but there are a few flaws. Chief among them is the idea that MMR is supposed to be a holistic measure of your skill with an arbitrary champion in an arbitrary lane is a nice one, but is your MMR supposed to reflect non-meta picks? For example does it contain some information about how you would fare at Janna jungle or Ahri ADC? If not, then that already implies some limiting factor on MMR. In other words, by your logic, the One True MMR for all players is a queue where you are randomly assigned a champion + role. That's obviously unworkable. So then you say, well, the One True MMR is a queue where you are randomly assigned a role but not a champion. But then people just start favoring certain champions again - you could probably OTP Kayle in this system. So then the One True MMR is a queue where you're randomly assigned a role and then randomly assigned a champion from a set of meta champions for that role? I agree with you that if you're a OTP you really are playing at an 'inflated' MMR, but only if you accept as true that your baseline MMR is a world where you're forced to play not your OTP. That world doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. Because otherwise even a hypothetically perfectly balanced player is playing an 'inflated' MMR because it doesn't take into account how he'd do on Janna jungle, whether he's up against OTP's on the other team, and the RNG of teamcomp building (for example is your MMR inflated if you pick Shaco jungle unless you OP.GG your adc and see he's a smurf and so you play Nunu? Is your MMR affected by your Zed mid main, forcing your top laner/jungler to go AP?). I am somewhat a fundamentalist, and find the random assignment of role + auto team construction by some sort of algorithm entirely workable and IMO that is the system that should give people ranked rewards. I don't think its unworkable, I think its AWESOME.
I agree with you on this point. I'd love to see a "pure" ranked system. We both know it'll never happen, though. And on top of that, the fact that a bunch of people are going to be stuck in games playing Janna jungle means that even if it could happen, it would probably just suck most of the time.
The best you could possibly do is to force everyone to play every role 20% of the time, forbid them from trading, and maybe have diminishing LP returns if you play the same champ over and over again. But again - obviously would be super unpopular.
|
It would also be retarded. In fact being forced to play more than 1 role is excusable only because of q times and this is coming from a fill player.
At the end of the day league of legends uses a system that tells you how good you are individually based entirely on team results. It simply can't be all that accurate anyway.
|
is there ip reward at level 8 i dont know about? i decided to make smurf and i distinctly remembered i had 3040 ip cuz i was 110 short from olaf i was saving entire time, few hours later i launch client to level it more and i have 7.3k ip ? got 4.3k ip out of thin air wtf?
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
All the drama on the subreddit is absolutely fascinating. Poor Tryndamere can't say anything right.
|
Tryndamere needs to learn from every other CEO ever.
Shut the hell up, you pay multiple PR specialists handsomely for that. At least, you should be.
<_<
Looks Mr TSM is using his PR team judging by the fact taht he said "statement is coming" some 6 hours ago and there isn't a statement out... Why doesn't Mr Riot Games?
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
I mean, Tryndamere doesn't get it because he's not a teenager. He has absolutely no idea how teenagers' minds operate when confronted with topics like these. They don't know shit about how the real world operates, and prefer instead just to rebel against any kind of authority and pretend to be oppressed.
So he should just shut up and let someone else meme about it instead.
|
Look MR TSM IS using his handsomely paid PR team.
Novel concept. I wonder if anyone else does this.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
I of course think it's hilarious that everyone always wants more "transparency" and more "honest talk", and when a CEO actually speaks his mind about what's really going on, they flip their shit and unironically call for him to get a PR agent. Yeah, because that's an improvement.
|
You can be transparent while using a PR team.
I honestly got over the patch cycle thing a long time ago. But I agree with Regi.
The thing is, people don't actually want transparency. That is the world we live in.. People think they do but they don't. People would rather bitch and bitch and bitch and then have someone say "Yeah, that sucks. Sorry." than have you tell them what you really think.
A large amount of this whole shit show is essentially people feeling like their team and their favorite players aren't being heard. There wouldn't be any shit show at all if they had someone come out and say "Regi makes some good points. We will look at this going forward." They literally don't have to promise anything... they just have to make it seem like they listened.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
Yeah. And I understand that that approach is better overall for Riot given the world we live in, but come on, Tryndamere's unfiltered Reddit posts are way more interesting than corporate bullshit doublespeak like that. But hey. This is why corporate bullshit doublespeak exists.
|
Well it didn't help that trynd didn't actually deal with the patch cycle issues. "Yea but we think that this years massive changes right before worlds are totally better for the viewer!" Which is what they said the last time... And the time before that...
Viewers are players! They want to understand the meta they're watching for worlds!
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
To be fair, it's objectively true that nerfing laneswap was 100% better for the viewer experience. Even Reddit agrees on that. Mordekaiser, not so much. Reginald has to realize that there's really no way he's ever going to convince Riot, hey, for competitive integrity you should keep this deeply unpopular thing in the game that makes people quit watching LCS.
|
I mean...
Tryndamere basically came out and called Regi a cheapskate who doesn't want to fairly pay his players, and said he is trying to funnel money out of competitive LoL into other e-Sports. I can see how Tryndamere would think that is a bad thing, but even if he felt that... him suggesting that is a bad thing can't possibly do anything but piss his entire customer base off.
Not to mention, I am fairly sure a lot of that is BS. I mean, TSM exists because of LoL, but I am also pretty sure TSM gets a lot more from HTC, Logitech, HyperX, Redbull, Geico, Twitch, and Cyberpower than they do from Riot in the first place. Which, may be largely because of their popularity with the league community, but it isn't like Riot was open to accepting more corporate sponsorships regardless.
Conveniently he went back and deleted half that stuff.
http://i.imgur.com/6H14ghF.jpg
vs
https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/4z1eec/reginald_on_how_riots_major_patch_changes_hurt/d6sarg4
Sure it is more interesting, but it is also some kind of stupid.
|
It does, as is typical of Riot, circle back to the lack of dissenting voices ever being in the room, or the company at all.
Sure Regi is never going to win the laneswaps argument, but then you accuse him of funneling money out of league? That's ridiculous. The LCS stipend doesn't cover half thier salaries and they probably don't come out ahead pre -sponsors unless they win worlds. Do they think TSM and CLG should just stick around as vassal states to a rigid company with no games evidently in the pipeline, that pays a stipend that was outdated 3 years ago, offers the lowest prizepool of any major game, and has low prospects for future monetization?
|
On August 23 2016 17:01 cLutZ wrote:
It does, as is typical of Riot, circle back to the lack of dissenting voices ever being in the room, or the company at all.
Sure Regi is never going to win the laneswaps argument, but then you accuse him of funneling money out of league? That's ridiculous. The LCS stipend doesn't cover half thier salaries and they probably don't come out ahead pre -sponsors unless they win worlds. Do they think TSM and CLG should just stick around as vassal states to a rigid company with no games evidently in the pipeline, that pays a stipend that was outdated 3 years ago, offers the lowest prizepool of any major game, and has low prospects for future monetization?
Modern Riot is George Lucas during the prequels. They don't have anyone around to question them because "It's Riot". and the people that do get attacked like crazy by fans, until the fans themselves see the handiwork and complain about it until the next project and then eagerly await more.
|
|
|
On August 23 2016 17:01 cLutZ wrote:
[...] The LCS stipend doesn't cover half thier salaries and they probably don't come out ahead pre -sponsors unless they win worlds. Do they think TSM and CLG should just stick around as vassal states to a rigid company with no games evidently in the pipeline, that pays a stipend that was outdated 3 years ago, offers the lowest prizepool of any major game, and has low prospects for future monetization?
Why does it matter if they come out ahead pre-sponsors? That's just not how sports work (at least those I am familiar with). They all rely on sponsorship, why should it be different in league? It's not the job of a league to make sure that teams have enough money. That's the teams' job.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On August 23 2016 14:27 iCanada wrote:I mean... Tryndamere basically came out and called Regi a cheapskate who doesn't want to fairly pay his players, and said he is trying to funnel money out of competitive LoL into other e-Sports. I can see how Tryndamere would think that is a bad thing, but even if he felt that... him suggesting that is a bad thing can't possibly do anything but piss his entire customer base off. Not to mention, I am fairly sure a lot of that is BS. I mean, TSM exists because of LoL, but I am also pretty sure TSM gets a lot more from HTC, Logitech, HyperX, Redbull, Geico, Twitch, and Cyberpower than they do from Riot in the first place. Which, may be largely because of their popularity with the league community, but it isn't like Riot was open to accepting more corporate sponsorships regardless. Conveniently he went back and deleted half that stuff. http://i.imgur.com/6H14ghF.jpgvs https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/4z1eec/reginald_on_how_riots_major_patch_changes_hurt/d6sarg4Sure it is more interesting, but it is also some kind of stupid.
Reginald asking for more money is a pretty interesting point. Where is that money going to come from?
In a traditional sport money comes from the fans via ticket sales, paying for cable TV, merchandise, and (indirectly) sponsorships. The first two aren't true for LCS since tickets cost barely anything and you can stream every game for free. And the third and fourth are already 100% for the owners, since I assume Riot doesn't take a cut of the TSM store's revenues or TSM's RedBull sponsorship.
So that money's only going to come from Riot. And that's what makes Tryndamere mad, though even he wouldn't say this. Why should Reginald get more money from Riot? What does Reginald do for Riot, compared to what Riot has done for him?
|
|
|
On August 23 2016 20:23 Prog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 17:01 cLutZ wrote:
[...] The LCS stipend doesn't cover half thier salaries and they probably don't come out ahead pre -sponsors unless they win worlds. Do they think TSM and CLG should just stick around as vassal states to a rigid company with no games evidently in the pipeline, that pays a stipend that was outdated 3 years ago, offers the lowest prizepool of any major game, and has low prospects for future monetization? Why does it matter if they come out ahead pre-sponsors? That's just not how sports work (at least those I am familiar with). They all rely on sponsorship, why should it be different in league? It's not the job of a league to make sure that teams have enough money. That's the teams' job.
It is actually how "sports" works. Most teams get the bulk of their money from "the league" through shared revenue on national deals, and gate is 2nd. The sponsors for NFL, NBA, MLB teams are a tiny portion. E-sports is different and a lot comes from sponsorships, but for TSM a lot of that isn't team-specific, some of it also is on Solomid.net, Redbull sponsors all TSM teams across games, etc. Its not really relevant, but neither is the accusation that money is being funneled out of League, because Riot is probably including money Regi gets from his website empire (and sponsors/streamers there) as "League revenue" when he could capture that with or without the LCS.
On August 23 2016 23:47 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 14:27 iCanada wrote:I mean... Tryndamere basically came out and called Regi a cheapskate who doesn't want to fairly pay his players, and said he is trying to funnel money out of competitive LoL into other e-Sports. I can see how Tryndamere would think that is a bad thing, but even if he felt that... him suggesting that is a bad thing can't possibly do anything but piss his entire customer base off. Not to mention, I am fairly sure a lot of that is BS. I mean, TSM exists because of LoL, but I am also pretty sure TSM gets a lot more from HTC, Logitech, HyperX, Redbull, Geico, Twitch, and Cyberpower than they do from Riot in the first place. Which, may be largely because of their popularity with the league community, but it isn't like Riot was open to accepting more corporate sponsorships regardless. Conveniently he went back and deleted half that stuff. http://i.imgur.com/6H14ghF.jpgvs https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/4z1eec/reginald_on_how_riots_major_patch_changes_hurt/d6sarg4Sure it is more interesting, but it is also some kind of stupid. Reginald asking for more money is a pretty interesting point. Where is that money going to come from? In a traditional sport money comes from the fans via ticket sales, paying for cable TV, merchandise, and (indirectly) sponsorships. The first two aren't true for LCS since tickets cost barely anything and you can stream every game for free. And the third and fourth are already 100% for the owners, since I assume Riot doesn't take a cut of the TSM store's revenues or TSM's RedBull sponsorship. So that money's only going to come from Riot. And that's what makes Tryndamere mad, though even he wouldn't say this. Why should Reginald get more money from Riot? What does Reginald do for Riot, compared to what Riot has done for him?
1. LCS tickets should cost more, particularly playoffs and Worlds which are consistently sold out in less than 24 hours even with website crashes. Its unfair to hold this against teams.
2. Broadcasts rights are certainly a revenue stream Riot could pursue, but hasn't done much. The LCS broadcast is bloated and non-monetized. Riot is essentially talking out of both sides of their face on this, they claim to lose money on LCS, but don't pursue the best way for it to "break even".
3/4. Yes. Probably. Unless you consider skins to be team-related merch (and you arguably should, how is Bjergson playing Popstar Ahri in a LCS final game not akin to him wearing a jersey?).
On whether Riot/Regi owes each other more. I don't think league needs or needed TSM, but it also is true that TSM is one of the teams that prospered, and probably was better off in the Pre-LCS format. So, while LOL is the platform that launched them, Regi owes almost nothing to Riot Games eSports division. Had DOTA2 been the MOBA de-jure maybe TSM launches there.
Also, this all boils down to skins. LCS is not run by Riot as a sports league, it is run as an advertising budget. This is why most of these potential revenue sources are left untapped, everything is focused on increasing merch (aka in-game skins) sales instead of creating a self-sustaining environment. Thus, almost all the money does end up in Riot's pocket, even though they get to tell a sob story about LCS being a negative to the bottom line.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
I don't think Riot actually tells it as a sob story. It should be patently obvious to everyone in the world that LCS is a loss leader. The only question is, how should the people that participate in that loss leader be compensated?
Suppose that Nathan's Hot Dogs is sponsoring a hot dog eating league. It pays regular salaries to competitors and organizes tournaments that pay out prize money. Should the hot dog eaters band together and demand a share of the overall sales of hot dogs? Isn't the real dispute just over how much their salaries / prize money should be?
Also, how the fuck is Riot going to sell broadcast rights? Because it's damn clear that if they were going to sell it to ESPN, ESPN is not going to be OK with them broadcasting the games on YouTube/Twitch. So the only way broadcasting money is viable is if you have to pay for ESPN in order to watch LCS. Yeah, let me know how that'll go.
|
United States15536 Posts
|
It's like Thresh mashed with Mord mashed with Mal. I like the mix, it feels like a gravediggers kit.
|
On August 24 2016 01:12 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 20:23 Prog wrote:On August 23 2016 17:01 cLutZ wrote:
[...] The LCS stipend doesn't cover half thier salaries and they probably don't come out ahead pre -sponsors unless they win worlds. Do they think TSM and CLG should just stick around as vassal states to a rigid company with no games evidently in the pipeline, that pays a stipend that was outdated 3 years ago, offers the lowest prizepool of any major game, and has low prospects for future monetization? Why does it matter if they come out ahead pre-sponsors? That's just not how sports work (at least those I am familiar with). They all rely on sponsorship, why should it be different in league? It's not the job of a league to make sure that teams have enough money. That's the teams' job. It is actually how "sports" works. Most teams get the bulk of their money from "the league" through shared revenue on national deals, and gate is 2nd. The sponsors for NFL, NBA, MLB teams are a tiny portion. E-sports is different and a lot comes from sponsorships, but for TSM a lot of that isn't team-specific, some of it also is on Solomid.net, Redbull sponsors all TSM teams across games, etc. Its not really relevant, but neither is the accusation that money is being funneled out of League, because Riot is probably including money Regi gets from his website empire (and sponsors/streamers there) as "League revenue" when he could capture that with or without the LCS.
Maybe it's different in the US, but I am certain that in European sports most teams get barely anything from the league*. And certainly the teams do not break even pre-sponsors. There is a reason why football (soccer) teams have to provide a budget ahead of a season and only then they are allowed to play. And it's not unheard of that teams just go broke and are not allowed to play. Then they have to start new in a lower league (even big names, for instance the Glasgow Rangers 4-5 years ago) And there are similar systems in pretty much all European sports leagues.
*I say most, because the big teams do get some revenue from tv rights.
|
On August 24 2016 02:40 GrandInquisitor wrote:
I don't think Riot actually tells it as a sob story. It should be patently obvious to everyone in the world that LCS is a loss leader. The only question is, how should the people that participate in that loss leader be compensated?
Suppose that Nathan's Hot Dogs is sponsoring a hot dog eating league. It pays regular salaries to competitors and organizes tournaments that pay out prize money. Should the hot dog eaters band together and demand a share of the overall sales of hot dogs? Isn't the real dispute just over how much their salaries / prize money should be?
Also, how the fuck is Riot going to sell broadcast rights? Because it's damn clear that if they were going to sell it to ESPN, ESPN is not going to be OK with them broadcasting the games on YouTube/Twitch. So the only way broadcasting money is viable is if you have to pay for ESPN in order to watch LCS. Yeah, let me know how that'll go.
Well, yes, that is the dispute: How much the teams should receive each year as compensation for playing in LCS. In the real-world hot dog eating example they don't pay salaries, etc, instead each individual negotiates an appearance fee in addition to the prize money (this is akin to how the more open DOTA and CS scenes operate, where teams do, in fact, negotiate appearance fees for attending most of the "lesser" tournaments). In your situation, if the players thought they weren't getting paid enough, they would unionize and, yes, band together to demand a share of overall hot dog sales.
The issue is that, teams are not players, thus a team union would violate anti-trust laws. But, because of Riot's poorly-implemented system, a team union does need to exist to bring the revenue sharing into the real world. For all the clamoring people do for a players' union, it would be almost totally worthless in the Riot system.
Re: Broadcast rights. The simplest thing is to see if twitch or youtube will offer significant sums to be the exclusive streaming platform. The Chinese streaming competition has teams earning about a million dollars+ for players from teams like WE, EDG, etc to stream on a particular platform, CLG's Azubu contract was similar. The LCS can do much better than that. ESPN, NBC, Fox or the like would probably put stipulations on a broadcast, but that is the give/take of selling broadcast rights. It is a necessary step to make the "esports division" self-sustainable. That they don't demonstrates its not the priority.
|
|
|
|
|
On August 24 2016 02:40 GrandInquisitor wrote:
I don't think Riot actually tells it as a sob story. It should be patently obvious to everyone in the world that LCS is a loss leader. The only question is, how should the people that participate in that loss leader be compensated?
Suppose that Nathan's Hot Dogs is sponsoring a hot dog eating league. It pays regular salaries to competitors and organizes tournaments that pay out prize money. Should the hot dog eaters band together and demand a share of the overall sales of hot dogs? Isn't the real dispute just over how much their salaries / prize money should be?
Also, how the fuck is Riot going to sell broadcast rights? Because it's damn clear that if they were going to sell it to ESPN, ESPN is not going to be OK with them broadcasting the games on YouTube/Twitch. So the only way broadcasting money is viable is if you have to pay for ESPN in order to watch LCS. Yeah, let me know how that'll go.
If Nathan's Hot Dogs is the only producer of hot dogs in the world and the competition is one of their primary methods of motivating sales and specials of particular hotdogs, I think there's a pretty compelling argument for the competitors and teams receiving something tied to sales rather than flat compensation (especially the players). Especially when there's an ironclad rule preventing anyone besides Nathan's Hot Dogs from holding the events the competitors go to.
I also think the artists making the skins should get bonuses when one of their skins do particularly well but I doubt that's the case, they're probably wage slaves.
|
really disinterested in the rework of yorrick. He was a shambling corpse with a gravediggers tools jostling around him as he walked with a dilapidated corpses limp.
Now hes a buddist monk who will probably either become a meh split pusher or a tl secret op support pick.
|
United States37500 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GzkunaC.png)
