: > i.e. playing smart and making the games you do play count, instead of throwing time at it grinding through as many games as possible. In either cases, you are going in blind. and when the vision of victory is murky. Logically, starting a new game is the better choice. > Make that time count. Don't waste it playing at anything other than 100% You do not understand the notion of playing vs working... There is this little concept called incentive, and it vary from person to person. > ^ Thats a silly situation, but you can extrapolate it out to see what I mean. If you set your own deadline, thats up to you. But the season ends on X day and whatever you are on that day is what counts. If you wanna meet your goal before that, go ahead, but you cant complain that you didn't have enough time, when you chose it. Why do you think people take out a loan instead of waiting?? Same concept apply, they want the feeling of having it. You are using these robot like scenario and taking out the human element. >Isn't that the nature of a discussion? To evaluate choices and beliefs? Imagine if you will, this discussion: It is, but you are refusing to see it in another perspective. Your evaluation is more of an ideal, than it is being pragmatic. > If you've got a goal you find a way. By getting better at the game. Not by looking at the clock. >Well, thats out of my hands. If they don't want to follow the advice, thats a them problem. But I've said my piece. Your 'advice' is not realistic. You did'nt encompass scenarios where the game SHOULD BE FF. Or rather, you think such cases dont exist. You have this bright eyes view of how all games can be won as the underdog. > You were legit talking about a war of attrition, and mental constitution. Then do a 180 and be like "yea but no one really cares and its all just casual". Dude, if you could understand the context. It make perfect sense. Let me break it down further so it is less of a puzzle for you. When situations in game create emotional burden, you are better off cutting it short for the sake of mental health. After all, most players are casual. Even though the want for a higher rank is there, the desire itself is not a powerful one. So why stress over it and sit through a depressing match; When the alternative is to restart a new setting and go from there. > Also 'casuals' is a terrible term. There are people who play for money, and people who play for free. Any segregation other than that has no meaning in reality. Some people play more than others, but unless you're making bucks off it, it doesn't really make a difference what you classify yourself as, it's still just a hobby. Casual by it definition: Is used to describe a situation where there is an easy-going attitude toward the outcome. Some people play more than others, and **also expect more** than others. Those are not casual players. Casual players are the ones that dont have the drive to achieve the best they can. > Naturally people who **play more**, are **better at **the game and **achieve **more things than** people who play less**. Putting a tag on that is just a "I wanna feel special cos I play more Call of Duty than you!" thing. No, wrong. There are people who play to gain exprience to further their development, and those that play to kill time; And couldnt careless about improvement. You cant put two different motivations on the same boat. Doesnt work that way. > If you play games, you're a "Gamer" thats what the word means. Doesn't matter wether you play Dark-Souls 5 hours a day or Farmville once a week. The whole Hardcore/Casual nonsense is just sad. If you earn money from it, you're a professional. If you don't, you're a hobbyist. Again, different motivations create different modes of being. To simplify it, is to represent an inaccurate look at the situation.
> You are using these robot like scenario and taking out the human element. When I play ranked, the things I've mentioned is _exactly_ how I play. I have a full time job, I have friends/family, I have students, I have to clean the house etc, I have sports to go to. Hell, since the Victorious skin fiasco came about, I've been playing more ESO than league anyway, to spend my money elsewhere. So if I can do it, theres no reason why anyone else can't. > No, wrong. There are people who play to gain experience to further their development, and those that play to kill time; And couldn't careless about improvement. It doesn't matter why you play. If you aren't earning money from it, it's still just a hobby. Some people build $20 model aeroplanes with their dads in the holidays. Some people spend years building scale Millennium Falcons and USS Enterprises out of toothpicks. Theyre both still amateurs. It doesn't really matter what their motivation is, they're both still part of the same community. Neither party is or should be superior/inferior to the other, just because they have different reasons for doing what they do. > It is, but you are refusing to see it in another perspective. Your evaluation is more of an ideal, than it is being pragmatic. Oh I see it from many perspectives. But I've chosen to back this particular one. In my opinion, we should all strive for the ideal. This is a virtual world, it's one of the very few instances in life where we can have full control over the environment we put ourselves in. If we can choose everything and anything we put in it, why settle for anything less than the best we possibly can make it? So yes, our arguments should be for the ideal. You may not achieve the ideal, but you usually get something better than what you had to start with. Our discussion won't solve the surrender issue. Neither of us has the answer that pleases everyone. But if we don't talk about it, if we don't have a conflict of ideas, nothing changes, and the game never improves. We didn't need a new summoners rift. The old one was exactly the same dimensions as the current one. But someone somewhere thought: _"Ya'know, we can do better!"_ And they did. People argued then too, that they didn't need it, and it wasn't practical. And i'd love to see those people play on the old one today. I'm sure there were idealists like me within the dev team that always wanted something more, maybe they wanted map skins or permanent visual effects when terrain was hit by abilities. But were brought back by the people like you with a less idealistic approach. And between the two, managed to agree on something that wasn't ideal, but was still an improvement.
: My take... I play this game for fun. When the game stops being fun I rather forfeit and move to the next one. - Allies go AFK and we can't handle the enemy - Score is 30 to 5 and we die in seconds. - Team are a dogfest, insulting each other, being annoying and find more value on blaming than winning. - Team does not have any cohesiveness. No teamwork, someone never listen. - One person keeps disconnecting or lagging out. I play ranked almost exclusively because I find normal games boring. You can talk about "goals", "always trying to win winning", "why play rank" and all the other non-sense. **The fact are: ** - This is a game, and I play games for fun (even competitive games) - I like playing ranked - I find normal games boring - If I am no longer having fun I rather forfeit and find a new team or a new game. - Everything else you are talking about being the best, having a goal, time and everything else, is irrelevant to me (and to many others). That's your reason to play, I play for fun and what you are saying won't change my mind. **Where is the flaw of my logic?**
> **Where is the flaw of my logic?** There's no flaw in the logic as it affects **_you_**. Because thats all your reasoning is about; yourself. _(Count the number of "I"s in your post. Never a single "we".)_ But there is a flaw if you consider everyone else. They may still be having fun. They may still want to win. Is your fun somehow more important than theirs? Why should you get the option to end someone else's fun? You asked for a flaw. There it is.
: Actually got 14 day banned for this game.
I'm probably falling for some sort of troll here.. But why would getting kills make you immune to player behaviour discipline?
: > Except that league isn't a war. It's not a battle of attrition. Playing league is using time as a resource. And spending time to achieve an objective is the attrition. > You choose exactly when you want to fight. If you get tired or demoralised, don't play another, and come back the next day fully refreshed and ready to go. If they could do that in war, they most certainly would. When people set deadline for themself. Time is not on their side. You're refering to the casual rank players, and those are the ones that want the FF the most. Because wasting time on a losing game while being aimless is silly. In war, people rest when they can afford to. In league, people set time to play and climb rank when they're able. > Don't run into hours and hours of slogging out games. Choose when and how you play: And people have made their choice. But you dont like their choice. You want them to think your option is the superior one. > Play in the times when all the school kids with their raging hormones and big-dikkitis are **at school or in bed**. That alone will cut out 70% of the toxic abuse. People go to work man. > Play when you're not tired or emotional, and are more likely to make bad decisions. That'll stop you getting frustrated at yourself and compounding the problem. > Don't push your luck. If you're on a winning streak, stop playing so you can come back the next day in a positive frame of mind. **Sound advice**, however it is an ideal that is easier said than done. Humans are emotional creatures. Most of the time we follow our feeling rather than a strict path toward triumph. > Be smart about it. That's far more likely to increase your mental well being than surrendering. This is a game not a job, the phrase "be smart about it" can only extend so far. People are not gonna give a shit pass bragging right; And this is mostly kids. Casual players will always be the CORE of any games. You are trying to fit them into a higher category. Which most dont want to be a part of.
> Playing league is using time as a resource. And spending time to achieve an objective is the attrition. So wouldn't it make sense to achieve your goal in the least amount of time possible then? i.e. playing smart and making the games you do play count, instead of throwing time at it grinding through as many games as possible. > When people set deadline for themself. Time is not on their side. Again, make the games you do play count, rather than wasting your time playing at not your best. Also thats a self imposed deadline, hardly a race against time. _"I want to be gold in 5 MINUTES! OMG OMG OMG I DON'T HAVE ANY TIME!"_ ^ Thats a silly situation, but you can extrapolate it out to see what I mean. If you set your own deadline, thats up to you. But the season ends on X day and whatever you are on that day is what counts. If you wanna meet your goal before that, go ahead, but you cant complain that you didn't have enough time, when you chose it. > In league, people set time to play and climb rank when they're able. My point exactly. Make that time count. Don't waste it playing at anything other than 100% > And people have made their choice. But you dont like their choice. You want them to think your option is the superior one. Isn't that the nature of a discussion? To evaluate choices and beliefs? Imagine if you will, this discussion: _OP: "Hey guys, should there be a surrender vote in ranked?" P1: "Yes." P2: "No." P1: "Okay then." P2: "But you should keep doing your thing. Cos you're a swell guy!"_ What does this actually contribute to anything? Nothing. Quite frankly I don't really give a damn if you surrender or not. I don't really play ranked, and when I do its usually flex with a friend, so we just block the vote anyway. But our discussion gets people thinking. And who knows where that thought might lead. Getting people in the habit of thinking is the most important thing here. Not finding an actual Yes or No answer to the problem. > People go to work man. You don't have to tell me. Which is why I said: _"If you're really keen on advancing up through the ranks"_ If you've got a goal you find a way. > Humans are emotional creatures. Most of the time we follow our feeling rather than a strict path toward triumph. Well, thats out of my hands. If they don't want to follow the advice, thats a them problem. But I've said my piece. > This is a game not a job, the phrase "be smart about it" can only extend so far. You were legit talking about a war of attrition, and mental constitution. Then do a 180 and be like _"yea but no one really cares and its all just casual"_. Pick one. If people are playing to the point where they need to preserve their mental wellbeing. Then I wouldn't exactly call them "Casuals". Also 'casuals' is a terrible term. There are people who play for money, and people who play for free. Any segregation other than that has no meaning in reality. Some people play more than others, but unless you're making bucks off it, it doesn't really make a difference what you classify yourself as, it's still just a hobby. Naturally people who play more, are better at the game and achieve more things than people who play less. Putting a tag on that is just a "I wanna feel special cos I play more Call of Duty than you!" thing. If you play games, you're a "Gamer" thats what the word means. Doesn't matter wether you play Dark-Souls 5 hours a day or Farmville once a week. The whole Hardcore/Casual nonsense is just sad. If you earn money from it, you're a professional. If you don't, you're a hobbyist.
: There are times in game when you know you are doom. There might be faint breaths of life here and there, but you know the end is not far away. The FF exist so those type of game dont turn into a toxic verbal arena. > If you quit when things look rough, you're not playing to the best of your ability, whatever rank you achieve, isn't the rank you deserve. Let's us acknowledge that there are games where people gave up too early. But also acknowledge games where the continuing resistant is just a waste of time. One such example is, when **you **are the only fed player on your team. And the so called 'fed' only equate to the enemy team's lowest earner. The support. The more efforts you spent in a no win situation, the more exhausted you will be. It will have a snowball like impact on future matches. > If you don't accept and play out your losses, then your wins are meaningless too. Those who are unable to see defeat, are not fit to lead. It mean, more lives will be lost because the leader is too ignorant to know when to cut loses. In term of attrition, it is better to lose a battle and conserve for the war. When playing ranked games; It is better to accept a worthy defeat then exhaust yourself, at the cost of mental constitute.
> In term of attrition, it is better to lose a battle and conserve for the war. Except that league isn't a war. It's not a battle of attrition. You don't HAVE to have another battle straight after. You choose exactly when you want to fight. If you get tired or demoralised, don't play another, and come back the next day fully refreshed and ready to go. If they could do that in war, they most certainly would. Quality over quantity. It isn't RNG, you have MMR and LP to lose. Sheer number of games isn't going to necessarily advance you. If you want to talk war strategy. talk Brain over Brawn. Don't be the guy who runs into battle bruce forcing it with a machine gun. Be the tactician who is sitting back watching the guy with the machine gun run through the mines you placed the day before. Don't run into hours and hours of slogging out games. Choose when and how you play: _Play in the times when all the school kids with their raging hormones and big-dikkitis are at school or in bed. That alone will cut out 70% of the toxic abuse._ _Play when you're not tired or emotional, and are more likely to make bad decisions. That'll stop you getting frustrated at yourself and compounding the problem._ _Don't push your luck. If you're on a winning streak, stop playing so you can come back the next day in a positive frame of mind._ If you're on a losing streak, know when to cut your losses and call it. Take a break for a day or two, play another game, then come back when you're in the right mindset. _If you're really keen on advancing up through the ranks, change your schedule, so you are playing at times when others are tired and losing it, but you're fresh and ready to go._ Be smart about it. That's far more likely to increase your mental well being than surrendering.
: the difference is, league has a thing called snowballing. real life sports generally don't. enemy players on the field/court don't get stronger/faster/taller as they score. you 100% can still win the next quarter or half or set even though you lost the first. doesn't really work like that in league. as you suggested, there comes a point when there is nothing you can do. it really is up to the team that is way ahead to lose it (by dcing, doing really dumb shit etc). also you say ranked is to win more so than to have fun. that is true, but what is 'winning'? it's more than a single game, it is a grind. as you said, it's generally a coin flip. if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you, you would get exhausted and simply also run out of time to actually grind. flip side is also true. when you're way ahead, and it is just a matter of time before you win, you appreciate the surrender as it saves you time. also, you are not going to gain and learn much by playing those extra 5 minutes in a game that is 1 sided in your favour. as long as xp, gold, items and, therefore, snowballing are a thing, then FF should always be a thing. not to mention things like people afking etc.
Yea, snowballing is a thing. It plays the same role as endurance in a real game. Players don't get faster/stronger/taller as they score, like you say. But as the game progresses, they do get tired and slower and sloppier, and those people who train for those times, get less slow and less sloppy than the other players. So the same thing happens just in reverse. Also league has a power ceiling. With a few exceptions like Veigar. No champ gets stronger than a 6 item build. So even if the enemy is snowballing, you can ALWAYS catch up in the end. It doesnt matter how much of a gold/xp/item lead they have. You can always catch up. The trick is just to know how to stall out the game long enough to reach that ceiling. Funnily enough, a thing you don't get to practice if you surrender. If your argument is about people who AFK, then just make the surrender vote unanimous. AFKers get kicked from the vote anyway, so it shouldn't be a problem. But I've still won tons of games that were 4v5 from the beginning. > if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you Except that it's not an actual grind. It's not an RNG chest at the end of some raid. Sheer number of games won't necessarily advance you. Play 2 games of ranked a day, give them your all. Do that every day of the year, play normals to chill and practice. You'll be much better off than throwing hours and hours of average playing into ranked. Its a quality over quantity thing. In my experience, you advance more by playing 10 and winning 8, than by playing 40 and winning 20.
Nightjar (OCE)
: the surrender feature is there just incase, 4 players dc for instance, but the other team doesn't want to end and holds you hostage, or there is a bug that makes the game unwinnable, the immortal nexus. Unfortunately, you have to leave a way out just incase.
Then still have the surrender vote, but make it have to be unanimous. That would be perfectly acceptable in those situations, without compromising gameplay in regular games.
: Remove FF from ranked thoughts
There definitely shouldn't be a surrender vote in ranked. Quite simply, you go to ranked to win. If you're not prepared to try your hardest to win, even in a bad situation, then you don't really deserve to climb. You don't see the All Blacks just walk off the field at half time and go down to the pub because the game is looking like they won't win. The whole argument of "Oh well its so I can get into another game and not waste my time in a game thats already lost." is just an excuse for people not willing to try. I have won countless games where it looked absolutely impossible to win. Theres always a chance _(hey, the enemy might even disconnect for some reason, it's all happened before)_. Playing into a losing game isn't fun, if you don't want to do that, fair enough, the game is supposed to be fun, if you're not having it, stop playing, I won't fault you for that. But, if you want fun, play normals. If you want to do the absolute best you can to win, then play ranked, but don't give up as soon as shit hits the fan. Quite frankly, I don't give a f*ck what dodging or surrendering strategy the challengers/pros do. Name one, just one, sport on the international stage, where quitting halfway through a game is an acceptable thing. You play a game to the bitter end, whatever the outcome. Out of respect for your team, the enemy team, and yourself. If league wants to be a game where dodging and surrendering is an acceptable strategy to climb the ranks. Then maybe it doesn't deserve to be on the world stage. Think about that next time you press that button. My friend and I almost never surrender. And because theres two of us, no one else can pass the vote. And we win SO MANY games that are 'certain' losses. Because we don't quit when everyone else does, we have so much experience playing uber defensively, we know _**exactly**_ how our champs feel when behind and under-farmed/fed, we know how they will perform, and when they will spike again. And we manage to pull games back quite often. If I actually played ranked, then we would probably win a solid 30/40% more 'lost' games than most people we play with. You always see that one Zed that is 0/9 and leaps into battle in exactly the same way as if he was 9/0. Thats what you become when you don't play out your losses. You get really really good at playing well when you're winning. But don't know **** about how to play when you're behind. Don't be that guy. _______________ To look at it from the other side. Yes I can appreciate that statistically in terms of pure numbers, I can see why it's appealing to cut losses and begin the next game. League is a coin flip, most of the time its a 50/50 chance wether you win or lose. If you see the coin about to land on tails, catch it and throw it again right? No need to suffer through the process of having it land and everyone look at your defeat. It makes sense, you can fit more games into less time, more chances to win _(although people don't realise that you have equal chance of losing again as well, in which case you have crammed in more losing games by surrendering)_. But you really have to decide what you play ranked for. Do you play ranked to see the best you yourself can achieve, and be proud of? Or do you just want a shiner border than everyone else? It doesn't matter how. Another of my friends was boosted, he has a far shiner border than the rest of us, but you know what. It doesn't mean anything. Because we know he didn't get it, and he knows he didn't get it. It's not an accurate representation of his skill. But he does have a nice shiny profile and a nice flash skin to keep, no denying that. A skin that I will never have now, and he always will. And it doesn't matter how he got those things, he has them and I don't. **So if it's purely the outcome that you want, then by all means do whatever you can to achieve that. Dodge and surrender and play only the most broken and in meta champs. But don't you dare say that it was you and your hard work that achieved that reward. You exploited the system and thats how you got your edge.** If you quit when things look rough, you're not playing to the best of your ability, whatever rank you achieve, isn't the rank you deserve. Maybe you deserve higher, maybe lower. You may have the rewards, but can you look at them and think _"I sweat and bled for this!"_ I you can, good for you. But don't ruin other people's games just because you can't be bothered trying when things get difficult. This is all just my opinion of course, But I don't believe in the mindset of: _"Oh I'm losing, this one doesn't count! The next one counts!"_ If you don't accept and play out your losses, then your wins are meaningless too.
Rioter Comments
: who has the most cc?
It really depends on what you mean by "Most CC" Do you mean: 1. The champ with the highest number of abilities that have CC? 2. The champ that can keep you under crowd control for the longest amount of time. 3. The champ with the ability to interrupt you the most. For example, as for champs that can keep you CCed the longest, {{champion:22}} might well take the top spot (an educated guess seeing I haven't done the maths. Either way, she's up there!) But even though she can keep you immobile for 3 seconds, I wouldn't call her the "Champ with the most CC". So what you mean by "Most CC" changes what champs we can choose. Personally however, as a 'best of all worlds' contender. my money is on {{champion:154}} He has 1 ability that _**isn't**_ a knockup. But its not about numbers, its about how he uses them. He can't keep you 100% catatonic like Leona can by chain-stunning you. But because of the timing on his abilites, when one ends theres only maybe 0.1/0.2 seconds before the next one hits. So while there is some time, its not actually enough to do anything. So even though he's not keeping you CCed 100% of the time, he might as well be, because you cant do an awful lot in that time. Also unlike {{champion:111}} or {{champion:89}} all his CC is AoE or multi target. So thats a factor too. He is a disrupt god, and I think disrupt is far more deadly than straight CC duration. (although his CC duration is lengthy too). So {{champion:154}} has my vote.
: Why are people letting riot sell 2 epic skins for $200?
Yea, it's disgusting, I don't know anyone who is disputing that. And very few people are as mad about it as me... Prestige skins rob either your money or your time (or both). But you say _"Letting"_. Other than the overwhelming negative feedback the community has already given, and not buying the skin _(neither of which has had much impact thus far)_, what else are we supposed to do? It's Riot's game, they kinda just do what they want, and we have to live with it or stop playing. So unless you're able to convince vast swathes of the community to stop playing completely, I don't see how you're supposed to "stop" Riot from doing what they want? This is why Riot do these things, because it has very little negative consequence for them. They know that the majority of people are not going to stop playing completely just because they released a few overpriced skins. People will be mad for a few weeks, then realise it's staying, and just live with it. Like always, and they know this. So what proposal do you have to make us "stop" them? _(i'm genuinely keen to hear an actual plan of attack, because I want this BS stopped too)_
Aifread (OCE)
: The way the game is now, nerfs to damage are better than buffs. 80% of champs can kill someone within 5 seconds now...
Within 5 seconds? Man I wish I lasted that long against 80% of champs..
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Sesshomaru,realm=OCE,application-id=FjGAIbRv,discussion-id=cQE2qPcr,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-07T09:34:57.078+0000) Your formatting is {{sticker:zombie-nunu-hearts}}
^_^ Only thanks to Wuks' effort though: https://boards.oce.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/miscellaneous/AHREUGPW-boards-usage-guide-part-1-boards-markup
ToshiroT1 (OCE)
: When to Pick?
#**_~~Picking situationally~~_** I pick most of the time depending on what my team picks. If you counter pick an enemy, you counter that 1 player, _(and if you fall behind then you don't even do that.)_ and most of the time that counter is only for in lane anyway. But if you pick a champ that synergises well with your team, then rather than making 1 enemy player weaker, you're making 4 allied players stronger. One of your problems might be that most of your champs there all fulfil the same role Ekko/Zed/Fizz/Kat (within reason) do the same thing, jump in, eliminate someone, and jump out. Usually (not all the time), if you can pick Fizz into a matchup, you'll be pretty safe picking either Kat or Ekko too. And the reverse is also true, if you can't pick Ekko into a matchup, chances are Fizz and Kat will also meet the same disadvantages. _***~~So before trying to pick the right champ for the situation, i'd start with expanding the range of champs at your disposal.~~***_ Ill use myself as an example, I'm a mid laner too, I prioritise who I pick, from this level of importance (keep in mind that this is just what I do (or try to)): _***~~1st: Complement our own team's champions. (if my Jungle picks Malphite, then obviously picking Yasuo is a good idea) 2nd: Fill out any holes in our team (e.g. if we don't have CC, I won't be picking Karthus) 3rd: Bring my own flair to the table. 4th: Counter one of more of the enemy champs (i.e. Teemo into Nasus).~~***_ This order changes a little with situations. Sometimes some things just cant be done. And assassins throw in a new situation entirely (ill bet getting to that later). **To give examples:** When I pick Roaming specialists. >### *If our team has a hyper carry in bot lane, like Draven or Kai'Sa, I'll be tempted to pick someone like Aurelion Sol, so I can maintain a relatively consistent presence in bot to give Draven etc the early/mid game cushion they need to get rolling.* When I pick bruisers: >### *If my team is lacking in frontline strength, I have Swain or Vlad to fall back on, which sacrifices some long range poke and nuke potential, but alleviates the pressure off our more fragile backline players while still keeping up some decent AP damage.* When I pick damage/utility mages: >### *If our team is well rounded then i'll pick the class that provides what (I think) mid lane should bring to the game, I.e. ranged poke and CC, so I'll pick someone like Zoe or Azir etc. Seeming I don't have to pick up the slack for anyone else, I can focus on bringing out mid lane's individual strength.* Thats the basic principle, but then you can go deeper and get more champion specific. I.e. if we have a hyper carry bot, but she is Vayne, then I won't go Sol, i'll go Taliyah instead, because then not only can I roam bot often, but i'm playing a champ that makes the most of Vayne's kit, bringing out the potential of both champs. You can tailor how much of something you think you need as well, if we need a bigger front line player than Swain, then I'll pick Galio, and focus more on being a true tank rather than a mage hybrid. Likewise if we don't need quite as much, I'll pick someone like Malz or Ryze, who can still take a few hits, but aren't as squishy as normal mages. Then comes countering the enemy. Once I've looked at the type of champ my team needs, (Artillery, bruiser, roaming etc), and Ive considered what champs synergise (or don't synergise) with my own team, then ill look at the enemy. For example, if we need a poke mage, but the enemy has a Heimerdinger, then I'll narrow the pics to Syndra or Azir who can both fulfil the poke mage role, as well as countering Heimerdinger in particular. _______________________ #**_~~Assassins~~_** Assassins like always, are the class that throws a spanner in the works. They win and lose games drastically. Unless they are poorly designed, assassins fulfil a very specific role in league. Their main and arguably _only_ purpose, is to remove one _(or two if they're strong_) enemy champs from the game, and then get the fuck out _(essentially making the game a 4v4)_. So rather than focusing on helping your own team, you're focusing on breaking up the enemy's. In other words, assassins should be picked when your team's combined combo/teamfight isn't lacking any specific aspects. If your team can pull off a good strategy as a 4 man (i.e. without you), then your job as an assassin is to make the enemy team also a 4 man. With one important difference, you get to choose which 4 enemies are in the fight. Essentially removing a key player from _their_ combo. If they pick Yasuo/Ori/Amumu, their team synergises amazingly (almost certainly better than your team). So you job as an assassin is to select and remove the key player from that combo. _***~~In this situation you should be picking to kill Orianna.~~***_ Ori and Amumu's ults work as a good combo. Yasuo and Ori's ults work as a good combo. But Yasuo and Amumu together don't really help each other all that much. So you need to quickly make that decision and take out the key player to minimise the enemy's combo, allowing your team to have the upper hand. In this situation I would pick Kassadin _(my favourite assassin)_, over more rounded mid lane champs, in order to deal with the pressing threat of a team wide Amumu + Ori + Yasuo ult _(which obviously is more important to get rid of, than filling out holes in your own team)_. If you see a situation like this in champ select, then picking an assassin playstyle is very justifiable. But if your team is lacking certain things (like lacking in poke, or is looking a little squishy), AND the enemy team doesn't have some crazy wombo level shit, then you should be filling in the gaps on your own team, rather than playing the hero and going for the assassin pick. Assassins are _(in theory)_, a high risk high reward pick. If you do it right, it's devastating, if you do it wrong, you might as well not even be in the game. So unless there is someone in the enemy team who HAS TO DIE (like Ori in that example). You shouldn't really be picking an assassin unless you're relatively confident your team can hold its own without your contribution. If your team has holes, and theres no desperate need for you to be an assassin, pick one is a little irresponsible and selfish. Yes, if you're really good (like most classes), you can carry yourself a fair bit as an assassin-only player. But only to a point. Once real teamwork and synergy comes into play, you have to have a wider variety of options to pick from. With the exception of Zoe, all the champs you mentioned fulfil relatively the same role (within reason, obviously they each have their own unique flair). So if you're faced with a situation that doesn't call for an assassin, then you could potentially be robing your team of other needed stats. _(likewise if you play only poke mages, or only tanky champs etc. Its just more obvious with assassins because of the high risk high reward playstyle.)_ __________________________ #**_~~Where to from here?~~_** I've mentioned a lot of things. But don't just jump straight into playing all new champs and trying to consider all these things all at once. Start just by keeping up playing the champs you already are. But during the game, start to think _"What are we lacking, as a team?"_, and "_why?"_. As consistent themes start to crop up, _(maybe you're always short on poke?)_, start to investigate what poke champs you might be interested in, and give them a go. Once you've sorted out a poke champ, try to sort out a bruiser, or a roaming specialist. Once you've got a variety of champs to fall back on. Then start to focus more intently on filling the holes in your team. We all have favourites, and let that guide you. I like mages, so i'm always going to favour them. If I have a choice between a tanker champ, and a poke mage, I'll probably opt for the poke mage. Likewise with you and assassins, if you have the choice between an assassin and a roaming specialist, you'll probably pick the assassin. and thats okay! Don't be afraid of that, thats just your unique flair, and in such situations _***~~you should play what you are comfortable with.~~***_ I've won more games by playing my main into an unfavourable situation than picking a specific counter that I don't have much experience with. So like I said, take it slow, build up a pool of champs you're comfortable with that can plug different holes, and go from there. Don't jump straight in and think _"Im vsing Zed, so I NEED to play Lissandra, even though I've never player her!"_, thats not going to work. Good luck ^^ I hope this wall helped.
Rioter Comments
: Patch 9.3 notes
No Nasus nerfs? Okay then.....
: When I played him it didn't feel like that much more, but I was also playing him support so I hardly had the highest damage in the game. If it's problematic they'll nerf it.
I think the thing that makes me sceptical about towers and his passive, is that unlike Nasus etc, his looks and feels like an AoE ability, that happens around him rather than an on hit one. But I guess if Twisted Fate's red card works on towers then Sylas' isn't too abstract. Agreed though, if it's problematic, they'll stop it. I definitely haven't noticed it being a problem (like I said, I didn't even notice it at all at first). _(I want Azir's W tower damage back... whyyyy remove cool mechanics D,:)_
: Ult is a big issue, large range for a point and click ability Definitely needs to be a skill shot, and a blockable one at that, E second cast range needs an increase IMO, its his only major and safe engage, however the knock up is pointless The heal is a little oppressive, either increase CD, or decrease heal amount SUBSTANTIALLY Q is in a good place, easy enough to dodge, difficult enough to not be classified as skilless Passive shouldn't proc on towers, its actually ridiculous IMO, 600 (without lichbane proc) is stupid, either reduce its damage to structures (like to 50% or something) or remove the ability to use it on towers, his mana costs are too low for it to be like that, you can take out a tower at an insane speed
I don't think the ult is a big problem tbh, because it's more about how he uses it, rather than how he gets it. If he has to put in a ton of effort to grab an ult, and then has to put in a lot of effort to use the ult too, his own kit puts him at the disadvantage, when using an ult should give you an edge. Agreed that the passive shouldn't work on towers (tbh I didn't even know it did, I haven't been using it because I just assumed that it didn't work on them because why would it? it's an AoE.)
: Like all releases, he is strong as hell and will be nerfed in four weeks when sales die down. Zoe: Steals Summoner Spells Neeko: Steals appearances Sylas: Steals ults Riot is out of ideas.
I mean the idea of stealing ults has been floating around the fanbase for years, so it's not something they've just thought of. But if you're taking that approach, what about Jax/Garen/Xin/Voli etc who have been here since the beginning? So its not like they started out with tons of ideas and have been losing them.
Rioter Comments
: Nothings addressed
Why are you playing Ranked? Thats not so clever either, and it seems like the real problem to me. It's the beginning of the season, every Tom Dick Harry and all their dogs are going to be making a mad dash for ranked in the hope that they'll finally get placed in challenger, where they belong. They'll get placed in bronze/iron, play for a few more weeks get demoralised and realise they're not getting out, then stop playing ranked til next year. Also you have the actual good players who get placed lower than usual, and spend the next couple of weeks or so moving back up to where they belong. Either way, right now while the system is in flux, is the time where you are most likely going to have to contend with these people. So why, in the name of "logic" would you start your grind when theres a very high possibility that these two demographics will be placed in/against your teams? It makes absolutely no sense. Be patient. Wait a month: **Wait for** the tiers to even out, give it time for the bad players to fall below your elo and the good players to rise above it. So your games aren't likely to be negatively affected by either. **Wait for** any huge balance anomalies to be evened out over the next two patches. **Wait for** the new champ's hype to have simmered down so you don't have to waste a ban. **Wait for** any ranked issued (theres always some; LP gain/loss bugs, placement errors, etc.) to be ironed out. Let everyone who jumps straight into ranked on day 1 without thinking take the fall for all these problems. Then once everything has calmed down and evened out, then start playing ranked. The people in your bracket will be people who actually belong there and the system has had a month to put them there. Why take these unnecessary risks by starting ranked on day 1? Thats what really makes no sense here.
Rioter Comments
Nightjar (OCE)
: i mean, Zilean bombs, if you include their generous latch range have around the same range as lux's spells, gotta remember that it's 900 range+100latch range and 300 explosion radius, and upto approx 125 latch range if you juggle the latch with the targeting bug, and if you're using the triplecast dbl bomb combo on a minion and if you use the edge of the explosion to clip an enemy, Zilean's maximum effective range is between 1300-1325 range, over the top of a minion wave, with a very short cast time. This sounds very complicated, but since Q is Zilean's only damage spell, Zilean mains get pretty good at this gimmick within a few hundred games of practice. For the most part, this becomes a braindead habit, which is rarely punishing since it also hard shoves the wave and can zone the enemy away from your backline cs. Admittedly it can expend a bit of mana if the Zilean start's carelessly using this combo all the time, but Zilean's tend to opt for items like Ludens/RoA/Seraphs naturally anyway. Lux q has 1175 range and her e zone has an an absolute maximum 1310 range. So I'm not sure what you mean by Zilean having to move up or being outranged? The range difference is basically nothing, and since Zilean can already have increased movespeed from e, and cast whilst moving if he cancels the wind down from his q cast with a move command, it's much harder for the Lux to anticipate and reposition, dodge and capitalize on this very brief window when both champions are mutually in range. Also Zilean has dumb auto attack animation, since the windup for his projectile is very short and all his other spells can be used during the wind down, so it's often not safe to assume you can harass him when he's last hitting a melee creep. Since he may very well be eyeing one of your backline casters, to get his damage off on you, whilst eating the caster creeps and still not missing the melee last hit. Also TF q is nice poke if it lands, but otherwise it's good waveclear, he can use it for both simultaneously, so the acceptable projectile speed and damage is lower. It's a good bonus side effect, if it didn't damage minions or was blocked by minions or only did a small AoE splash damage on impact, it'd be alot worse of an ability. Zoe can be creative on how she wields her q, if she isn't trying to get a massive windup, it can be pretty difficult to dodge. The massive windup is really only when you have other cc on your target such as sleep or Nautilus. Not to mention the psuedo blink adds alot to the surprise factor of Zoe. I personally consider her more of an artillery assassin than a true poke mage. Viktor laser range is 1125, but again, it can be used for both waveclear and poke, at the same time and has a faster travel time, since whilst 1350 speed sounds slower, it's 1350 travelling down 500 units, rather than 1200 travelling down 1175, and once upgraded the repeat damage is a good zoning tool. And I guess I'll correct myself, Lux is pretty long range, but she's sort of a member of the 'annoying range' club than a true poke mage, especially since her spell travel times, mean that opponents will often move back, and make her range sometimes feel shorter (against a 600+ movespeed Zilean, you will definitely feel your spell's travel times being sluggish).
I will admit It sounds like I have a lot less experience with Zilean than you. I see him only now and then, and usually all I see is him ulting himself and leaving the ADC to the wolves. Admittedly I didn't take the double bomb clipping into account, I only used the base range and the initial latch. So with that additional range, he may well be a competitor for Lux! _(we have now gone out of my experience with Zilean so I'm having to take your word for it)_. Assuming you're good with that gimmick I can see how he might be a pain for her. Either way, it sounds like he still has to put in a lot more effort to hit her than she does to hit him though. especially if he has to use 3 spells just to land any damage at all, and even then can only match her range through a gimmick that needs a lot of practice for. So regardless of who **_can_** get the better poke, it still seems like in terms of effort, Lux is still "Input < Outcome" while Zilean is "Input = Outcome". But I haven't played or Vsed a Zilean in mid for a long time, and certainly not with/against Lux in recent memory, so i'm not going to stake my life on that. Twisted Fate's Q is good wave clear, but in my opinion some of the best pokers/harassers can poke without passively pushing too hard. Twisted Fate pushes waves hard just by **_trying_** to poke, so does Xerath, Velkoz etc. Which inevitably opens themselves up to ganks. _(which as immobile squishies is often the last thing you want to do.)_ People like Annie and Vladimir, may not have the best poke, in terms of poke itself. But because they have these completely reusable low CD single target abilities, they can harass the enemy down without touching any minions at all, and thus keep the lane frozen wherever they need while forcing the enemy away from the minions. Where as Xerath/Vel/TF etc, always end up under the enemy tower before long, if they're trying to poke. So while Annie and Vlad etc aren't long range artillery mages, their ability to poke without pushing make them just as scary. So poking abilities with great wave clear aren't necessarily always good. Dont get me started on Viktor's laser, I hate vsing that thing. It's so hard to predict, and it IS fast, like you say. > against a 600+ movespeed Zilean, you will definitely feel your spell's travel times being sluggish No arguing with that. Most spells feel sluggish already, the MS creep in this game has gotten worse and worse. Trying to hit people with abilities like Taliyah's W or Karthus' Q isn't getting any easier.. Movement speed has become a powerhouse of a stat in the past year or so.
Nightjar (OCE)
: I don't actually hate Yasou players, it's just a little unexciting when every 2nd game you'll see a Yasou in it. On the yearly review he is very likely the most common 'most killed and most killed by' champion for most people. Also Lux's q isn't as long range as it seems because it moves slowly. Again, it's not reliable poke because it moves slowly and needs to be positioned to avoid the minion wave. Also in practice, she's not really a poke mage, because any other reasonably ranged mage is going to abuse her so hard. Zilean isn't classified as a poke mage, but Lux will get poked way harder in this matchup.
I mean, that was kinda a joke. Yea, thats the same reason why I don't like Yasuo. I like Variety, and Yasuo/Lee etc remove variety from the game. You'll notice that I don't complain about champs like Urgot much, even though they are overturned, I really don't care because I see one maybe once a week, so the way I see it, they don't really affect the game as a whole much. However, I deal with Yasuo on a face to face basis multiple times a day, every day. So every little thing he does that steps even a nanometer out of line, pisses me the fuck off, because I have to deal with that in my face every single day. Its like that saying how you start to hate even your best friend if you cant get away from them _(people on treks in Antarctica or shipwrecks etc)_. Yasuo was once my main, now I despise him. Lux's Q moves at the same speed as Zoe's Q, _(is Zoe's Q not poke?)_ Also she only has to position around half of the minion wave, as her Q goes through the first thing it hits. _(Zoe's Q doesn't go through anything.)_ Her Q is faster than Twisted Fate's Q, i don't think there's many people who wouldn't classify that ability as good poke. But like I said, she doesn't even need to hit, it just needs to keep you dodging and scared, waste your time, and keep you away from CSing easily. Sometimes knowing it **_can_** hit, and knowing she can use it anytime, is more scary than it actually being thrown at you. Look at Karthus, he doesn't need to hit you with his Q, he just needs to keep you running in circles unable to stand still long enough to do anything. > any other reasonably ranged mage is going to abuse her so hard She outranges almost every mage in the game. So unless she's a cabbage, she's got a pretty good chance of not being bullied too hard. Both of her abilities are longer than everything Syndra has. Certainly longer than Azir's _(and unlike the Shuriman shuffler, she doesn't have to stand still for most of the time when using it)_, her range is comfortably longer than Karthus' Q. She outranges Brand/Taliyah/Neeko/Karma/Veigar/Viktor/Cassiopia/Orianna etc. So i'm not exactly sure who these 'reasonably ranged' mages are? Including the hitbox, Zilean's Q range is still shorter than both of Lux's spells. So i'm not quite sure how she's getting out-poked by him either? Admittedly if I have ever had a Lux/Zilean matchup in mid lane, it was so long ago I cant remember it, but it doesn't sound like a common problem. ZIlean is a pain, always has been, probably always will be. But he suffers the opposite affliction to Yasuo. Turns out being a wind samurai is just a bit cooler than being a crusty old man with 5 voice over lines _(bad voice over lines at that)_. To map it out, both Lux and Zilean have 550 AA range. Lux's Q has a range of 1100 (including the hitbox, her E is longer still), which means if they are both attacking the melee minions from max range, she can still potentially hit him with both spells, but he cant hit her with anything without moving forward. It doesn't matter how slow or fast either of them are, it is **impossible** for his spells to hit from that range, but not impossible for hers. So as long as she maintains the range (which is where the skill comes in), he can never touch her, but she can touch him, even if she has to throw out 100 spells to do it. But even if Zilean does out-poke Lux somehow, thats not really a big thing. A champ tons of people play, gets poked by a champ no one plays, (and even fewer people play well). Hardly an issue for her. Maybe it'll affect mid lane Lux in 1 out of 300 games? Thats being generous, I cant even remember the last time I saw a Zilean in mid. Support Lux maybe is affected slightly more, but then the dynamic is so different in bot lane, that you cant know who has the upper hand without knowing what ADC's they are paired with.
Nightjar (OCE)
: tbh I don't even like Lux, can't really play her well but I can play against her fairly easily. As much as I've been pointing out her weaknesses, she's one of my least favourite examples of kit recovery since her base damages are too high and whilst her cc sucks, if paired with any other cc, it becomes oppressive, and lategame Lux is always useful regardless of the competence of the player. Even then, there are plenty of mages who are less interactive to face, Zilean, Orianna, Syndra, Veigar, Ziggs, ect... Also with higher skillcap champions, you trade off ease to play, with flexibility, the ability to outplay, make big turn arounds through sheer mechanics and generally slightly higher innate 'kit power', as a trade off for this difficulty. Also to your 1k range arguement, firstly, her w isn't poke, so the range doesn't matter. Ults generally don't matter in early laning, and because of it's charge time, is only a finisher to be paired with her q or other hard lockdown cc, so again not poke. Her q moves slowly, and so is about as valid as poke as a Morgana q (which btw has a similar range, and isn't poke). Her auto attack range is 550, which is pretty good but not that unheard of for a mage, most mages have 550 auto range, and if you're walking up to let lux get her passive procs on you, you deserve to lose lane. It's an annoying zoning tool, but again that's why most midlaners either have ranged spells or mobility and alot of burst. I hate people complaining about easy vs hard to play champions. You decide what champions you play. Some people like easy to play champions so they can focus on playing around their opponent's champions, other people like to put it all on the line and believe they are mechanically superior. League caters to a wider audience, you aren't better simply because your champion is hard to play.
I wouldn't say her CC sucks, but its certainly not as game-changing as a morg Q or a Zoe E, that's for sure. Her Q may or may not _technically_ be poke, but it doesn't cost her much to throw it out _(considering it doesn't leave her completely defenceless)_ and the payoff if you do hit it, is massive. So Lux tends to throw it out a lot more than other mages would with their CC. So regardless of wether its poke or not, it's still something you have to be dodging relatively often. Ahri isn't a poke mage, she technically qualifies as an assassin, but that Q is still flying back and forth like no ones business. Yea its not a Zigg's or Xerath poke, but it's still annoying as hell to have to keep dodging. The 1k argument definitely holds. Lux's Q has a longer range than Vel'koz's Q, and her E has a smaller range by 50, but because the range is until the centre of the AoE, not the tip, her E ends up having the longer range by 105. Lux is classed as an 'Artillery champion' under Riot's released sub-class regime Which's direct description is: > Artillery Mages are the masters of range, and they leverage that advantage to whittle down their opponents over time from great distances. the artillery champions are: {{champion:126}} (hybrid skirmisher) {{champion:99}} (hybrid burst) {{champion:110}} (hybrid marksman) {{champion:161}} {{champion:101}} {{champion:115}} {{champion:142}} Even Azir, and Syndra don't make that list. So she is a poke mage, I don't really think thats up for debate. We can disagree with it if we want, _(and I gotta say, labelling all the champs like that seems a little fruitless, considering the vast variety of niches)_ but thats what Riot has classified her as. > I hate people complaining about easy vs hard to play champions. Im not complaining about easy vs hard. I'm pointing out that champions who put little effort in _(doesn't necessarily mean they are easy champs)_, and require a lot of effort to VS, leads to frustration. Garen is a relatively easy champ who requires little effort. Azir is a relatively difficult champ who requires a lot of effort. Zoe is a relatively easy champ to play, but she has to put a lot of effort in to land her abilities. Katarina is a relatively difficult champion to play, who doesn't put much effort in to land her abilities. **Input > output**, doesn't necessarily mean "Hard to play", and **Input < output**, doesn't necessarily "Easy to play". > You decide what champions you play. Some people like easy to play champions so they can focus on playing around their opponent's champions, other people like to put it all on the line and believe they are mechanically superior. League caters to a wider audience, you aren't better simply because your champion is hard to play. I totally agree with this. We all pick the champions that suit us. For example Aurelion Sol is easier for me to play than Master Yi. Despite Yi being the training wheels champ, he just jarrs with my style of playing. I click with Sol, I don't click with Yi. So despite his drawbacks, I genuinely find Sol easier to play, (hella frustrating at times) but still easier. That doesn't mean I'm better than Yi players. My champion is simply different to theirs, and my brain is simply wired differently to theirs. In a fight between Sol and Yi, Yi will almost certainly win, but that doesn't make Yi players better than me either. Eventually players try out all champions, and we stick with the ones that click. Thats all that matters. _(but that doesn't mean we cant still hate on Yasuo players)_
Nightjar (OCE)
: no you don't get it, every champion has weaknesses, and sometimes it's not obvious in their kits. Lux suffers from short range in the lategame, and her poke isn't nearly enough to put her in the poke mage category since she has 1 spell for poke, which also serves as her primary source of waveclear (which is a very distinct weakness Lux has), and isn't nearly as easy to land as you make it out to be. Nor does it combo into the potential for alot of damage like true poke mages, since at maximum range it's hard for lux to follow up on the poke landing. Her ranges seem high, but her projectiles aren't especially fast, and she needs to position aside from the minion wave to land her abilities, since it is very hard for Lux to weave a q through a minion wave. Lux needs to be very aware of her own positioning and her opponents positioning to land her poke (unless her opponent is a moron who stands immediately within the caster minions and forgets that into mage matchups this is the worst place to position). 1 long range spell does not qualify a poke mage. Sion is not a poke mage, Morgana is not a poke mage. Zilean bombs have the same range as Lux e, alot more damage, and he has 2 of them, but he's not a poke mage (although his poke is absolutely more oppressive, he's still a midrange utility mage).
I seem to have hit a nerve here regarding Lux. Sorry about that. But I disagree with some of what you say, she can definitely poke/harass effectively. > 1 long range spell does not qualify a poke mage I mean, she doesn't have a single ability under 1000 range, that's hardly "1 long range spell". Secondly, you're ignoring her free Lich bane passive, which gives her a hell of a lot of harass and followup on her poke _(not to mention the actual lich bane that she also buys)_. And her AA range is second only to Annie and Anivia in mid lane. _(neither of whom actually use autos to fight or harass)_. > and isn't nearly as easy to land as you make it out to be I have never had issues landing it, and I'm on a permanent 220+ ping in Japan, so if I don't have a problem using it, its definitely not hard. Try landing all your stars in a fight without missing any, as Sol against champs with today's level of movement speed and mobility, then tell me how hard Lux's shit is. Lux's E is exactly the same speed as Zoe's Q. Yet Lux's is a very decent sized AoE, and goes through minions. Zoe's also has 80% damage reduction on enemies beyond the first _(in the tiny area that it hits)_. I don't see the same penalty on Lux's? So if Lux's is so easy to avoid, why do so many people seem to have such issues with Zoe? But it doesnt even matter if her abilities hit or not, it's not relevant to what im saying. Unless she's a complete cabbage and is throwing them behind her or into the river, you still have to dodge it. Which is draining, and takes up lots of time. > Lux needs to be very aware of her own positioning and her opponents positioning to land her poke You've just described 90% of mages. How is this somehow _special_ counterplay for Lux? _"Being out of position is bad for your health. and It's easier for you to hit people when they are out of position."_ That sounds like pretty standard gameplay for all champions. Lux doesn't have an escape, many mages don't. But her ult is the only ability she has that doesn't have a defensive capability. Most immobile mages can DEFINITELY not say the same. So its not like she's constantly at the mercy of the world around her. Yea if she blows all her spells and misses, she's probably gunna die, and deserves to, just like any other mage does. However because of the order of her kit, she never **_needs_** to throw out all her spells, unless she **_knows_** they won't miss. If she misses Q, she's still got a hefty shield and slow to get her out of scrapes, and obviously if she misses Q, she's not just going to willy-nilly chuck out E. But if she does hit Q, she just dumps everything on the victim for a kill. _(I.e. punishing to VS, less punishing to play.)_ If she misses E, it's not like she's forced to use her other abilities, she's still got a multi-target 2 second snare, and a shield as a crutch. So she can always throw out relatively aggressive spells, without compromising her whole defence. Yea she has tradeoffs like bad wave clear, _(still better than Zoe though, who everyone keeps telling me is an awful champion)_. But wave clear isn't really an issue in lane, which is where she is the most annoying to vs. Her last hitting is easy, especially if she uses her E to poke, because it gives her a lich bane on half the minions in the wave, as a side bonus after damaging and getting a lich bane on you. But ill say again, I still don't think Lux is a problem champ, she's just more frustrating than some. Yea I play Azir, and yea id rather not vs Lux when I do. But it doesnt mean Im completely ignorant about her (hell, I play her often enough). But it gets real old real fast, when you're playing someone who requires as much concentration as he does, and are VSing someone who literally is just chucking AoE/multi-target crap at you 24/7 _(from a relatively safe distance)_ just to upgrade forms faster. I still beat Lux as Azir on a relatively regular basis. But do I enjoy trying? No. _________________________ But despite all this, this post isn't even about Lux, she was just the example. Change it to whoever you want, if you must. The point was that some champions require less skill to play than they do to vs, and this is the element that causes frustration, not actually how strong or weak a champion is.
Nightjar (OCE)
: Lux is relatively simple, but she also has things to consider. Her q is on a decent cooldown but if she wastes it, she generally doesn't have as many defensive options as other battle mages and she has no mobility similar to a poke mage, which can make her more vulnerable to sticky assassins compared to alot of other mages. Similar to most midrange battle mages, against competent players, poke mages tend to have an advantage in the matchup, and she has no fast CC that makes catching a fleeing enemy difficult. Lux also doesn't have good waveclear and next to no waveclear when forced to use her e as poke, and she cannot hardshove and instantly eat a wave like alot of other mages. Meaning often the way to win mid for some matchups, is just to perma shove mid and roam. She can't just willy nilly use her ult for bonus damage due to the long immobilizing and very obvious charge up, she needs to have landed her snare to make use of it, and lategame most of her damage gets loaded into her passive procs, which forces her to position closer than most mages in a lategame scenario to pump out acceptable damage. Lux is very much a basic champion with a very all around generalistic kit, she isn't an especially strong teamfighting playmaker, she doesn't have mobility, she doesn't have great range, whilst she has a strong combo, it requires her to use all her spells and does not hit many targets. She offers little in support besides a snare, a slow and a tiny shield, so she's mostly there for her high damage. Lux is probably slightly over tuned, as a beginner style champion, as is quite common in league, but she isn't really OP and even though it's often not really mechanics, she has alot of things to consider when being played properly.
I agree, she has lots of other tradeoffs like you mentioned when it comes to winning the game in general. But most of these tradeoffs aren't felt when you're actually fighting her. Im not saying she is OP, or at all unhealthy in terms of winning/losing a game. I'm not saying she's impossible to fight, far from it, i'm just saying, it doesn't take much effort for her to throw shit at you, but it takes a lot of effort to dodge that stuff, and it is really punishing when you don't manage to dodge it. That kind of gameplay isn't fun. Id say that Kog'maw is far unhealthier for the game than Lux, but the effort input needed to play Kog'Maw is relatively the same as the effort input needed to fight Kog'maw, so he doesn't feel frustrating and groan-worthy to fight. Unless you're someone like Zed who can magically hop over all her stuff while simultaneously taking her out, Lux is draining to fight. Also she's hardly mid-range, Viktor is mid range, Malzahar is mid range, Karthus is mid range, Azir is mid verging on long range, and Lux outclasses even his range. Lux is in the weight with Xerath and Vel'Koz. She doesn't have a single ability under 1000 range, and all of them are muti-target/AoE.
: You should, honestly, rename this thread to, “I do not know how to verse Lux” She is an obnoxious champion, I agree. You compared her to Zoe and you were right. Both of them throw out the same type of spell then blow their whole kit on it. Lux on her snare and Zoe on her sleep. The issue is that all of mid lane play the exact same. Annie is the same, Syndra is the same, Galio is the same, Orianna is the same. Give me one mid lane champ that is not reliant on hitting one brainless ability and then collapsing. You compared Lux to Zyra but the two are almost the exact same. Anyway, when you talk about little effort to play, you pretty much remark on the entire roster. Who, in this game, actually takes effort to play? No one. Zed, Yasuo, Yi, Tryndamere, Riven, Galio, Rengar, and Kha’zix are all champion that fit into your title with more accuracy than Lux.
I know how to vs Lux, but what I'm saying is that it takes so much more effort to vs her than it takes to play her, which leads to the frustration behind why players call "OP" rather than understanding what's actually happening. > Give me one mid lane champ that is not reliant on hitting one brainless ability and then collapsing. Aurelion Sol, (yes he has a collapse ability, but that is not what his play style revolves around), Azir, Karthus (mostly), Kassadin, Teemo, Ziggs, _(you can add Swain and Vlad as well depending on your definition)_. Not to mention the plethora of ADC's and fighters that people take mid nowadays. But mid laners are for the most part a glass cannon style, that's how they play. Pick a target, and throw everything at them. Most glass canons in most games rely on lockdown and burst. Its like saying _"Yea, well find me an ADC that doesn't use kiting." _ yea there are a couple, but essentially that's what the class is built around. If that's your complaint, might as well complain about tanks who have survivability spells. > You compared her to Zoe and you were right. Both of them throw out the same type of spell then blow their whole kit on it. Lux on her snare and Zoe on her sleep. But the way they do it is different, regardless of what people think of her, Zoe does need setup, and there is both room for her to screw up her combo, as well as time for you to reposition or use defences. Once you get hit by Lux, that's it, no second chances, and its virtually impossible for her to fuck up. There are so many ways to reduce Zoe's impact, _(the least of which being: Use the one and half seconds to walk behind minions)_ Once Lux hits you with Q, the rest of her kit stops for nothing. Maybe the windwall will do it, but if you had a windwall you wouldn't have been hit by the Q in the first place. And her kit's CD is shorter than Zhonyas. > You compared Lux to Zyra but the two are almost the exact same. No, that's the point, yes they can both achieve the same outcome, but Zyra can't achieve it after throwing out random E's, hoping they hit then dropping her combo on them, like Lux can with her Q, Zyra does need some degree of either setup or prediction. In lane, Zyra's E snares for half the time Lux's Q snares for, and she has twice as many spells to drop on you in that time. Zyra can hit you with her snare, then slap you with other spells, you're right, very few mid laners cant do that, but unlike Lux, Zyra cant maximise her damage by hitting snare first. If you want to maximise Zyra's damage, you have to place two seeds then land Q, THEN land snare, then ult. Otherwise the enemy spends less time immobile and thus less time getting hit by plants. > Who, in this game, actually takes effort to play? Aurelion Sol, Azir, Kindred, Kalista, just off the top of my head. Anyone who requires constant awareness and/or a decent amount of setup. > Zed, Yasuo, Yi, Tryndamere, Riven, Galio, Rengar, and Kha’zix are all champion that fit into your title with more accuracy than Lux. I 100% agree, but like I said in my post, Lux is the easiest to demonstrate it with. She's simple, you can easily analyse her kit without getting too deep. Try to analyse Yasuo without getting lost down the deep rabbit warren that is his fucked up existence. And i'm not going to talk about Yasuo if I can help it, it just drags the same people out of the woodwork and always ends in violence. I have almost nothing against Lux herself. Pretty much the only thing I don't like about her is how she (relatively) is Low risk high reward. I never said she was OP or was a problem for the game, like Nightjar said she has other tradeoffs that nullify her advantage over the game in general. Im just saying it takes effort to vs her, more so than it does to play her, and that style does not promote fun.
: Well, Aatrox and the next prestige skins are 100% cash grabs, Prestige KDA Akali and Kai'sa cost under 20 dollars, same as an epic skin, but they actually encourage playing the game. I had fun grinding for KDA prestige Kai'sa with the pass, but now it's just drop 100+ dollars for a skin that is of epic quality, not even ultimate. It's disgusting that riot made aatrox cost that much, let alone even thought about it.
You forget that it cost a lot of people a lot more than $20 for Kai'sa. Some people like yourself had the luxury of playing as much or as little as you wanted. Other people have regular commitments, or real life factors that prevent them playing enough to earn the skins (it was a hard grind, I played for hours every day, and only barely made it, and even then I still had to buy some tokens.) Not to mention that Akali's grind happened over Christmas/new years. where a vast majority of people travel or have to spend lots of time with family. Thus through no fault of their own, people don't have enough time to sit through the summer break glued to League of Legends for weeks on end, just for a gold chroma. _(Like honestly, what self-respecting company puts out a massive grind over Christmas?)_ So many people did fork out money for the hugely overpriced bundles of crap, that was the only way to get more tokens. (because a lot of people cant just say _"Sorry Grandma, it was nice that you travelled across the country to see me, but imma lock myself in my room and grind out 1800 tokens for the next couple'a'weeks"_) So, just because it didn't cost you personally, doesn't mean many people haven't already been forced to pay this sort of price for previous skins. It's been disgusting long before Aatrox. Aatrox was just Riot outwardly being greedy in the light of day, instead of loosely trying to hide it.
Rioter Comments
: Yeah I don't think anyone's all that happy with them over this. Good opportunity to speak with the wallet though, think there's gonna be a lot of support for that option.
Yea for sure. Aatrox is one of my major top laners, and I will most definitely NOT be getting this skin. Didn't get the Akali one either, just out of sheer spite for the way the player base has been treated in recent months. Multiple batches of skins all with limited borders and chromas coming out per patch, multiple patches in a row. Then this prestige nonsense. Ive bought every limited/legacy item since season 2 up until late this year (With the exception of 1 Christmas icon). Because when it's just a few a year, why not? Not anymore. My loyalty only spreads so thin. Too much, too fast, too greedy. {{sticker:sg-ahri-3}}
: Prestige Points and new prestige edition skins
I actually can't discuss this. If I were to tell Riot exactly what I think of them right now, I would be slapped with a chat restriction or worse... {{sticker:slayer-jinx-catface}}
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: If you don't want to give up that privacy, don't use Windows, or at least use a browser that doesn't list tab titles in the process name. Anyone who believes we are anonymous on the internet should take the time to learn exactly what data they are putting out there. Facebook is a big offender but people still use it because it's convenient. If you don't want a corporate database knowing basically everything about you, don't use Facebook, or at the very least use it in a browser/mode that supports self contained instances. Facebook looks at literally everything. I wasn't saying "everyone is doing it so it's fine", I was saying "It's not malicious so why does it matter?". There are steps you can take to protect your privacy if you are concerned about it: Not using certain services (or using them in a limited capacity), using a trusted VPN, having certain security protocols in place, etc etc. These are the choices we all make, and most people will choose convenience over privacy, but that's still a choice they have made, even if it is by not taking the time to understand the environment.
I use a Mac, always have, probably always will. I also don't have Facebook, never have, _(yet funnily enough they still collect information on me)_. **Disclaimer:** Im not a guy in a tinfoil hat or anything. I use a mac because 1. i'm a graphic designer, and 2. they're prettier and made of metal instead of plastic (looks matter, call me shallow xD). And I don't have facebook or many other social media outlets because 1. I don't have time to be checking notifications all the time, and if I did get facebook, I couldn't resist but spend time on it, and 2. any friends I need a program to keep track of, are not really meaningful friends. Speaking personally i'm not worried about people/businesses collecting information on me, It's not like I have anything big to hide or anything (that i'm aware of?). But that being said, i'd prefer to be asked beforehand, just as a courtesy thing right? saying "It's not malicious so why does it matter?" is the same thing _(in terms of what I was talking about anyway)_. For example, thats what people who smoke weed say all the time, but it's no secret that most people who do hard drugs started with the smaller ones first. Yea of course some people don't progress to harder stuff. But the fact of the matter is, if we get strict on the small stuff, the big stuff looks after itself. League has a 0 tolerance policy of cheating, and whaddayaknow, a lot less people cheat in league than do in other games. _"Look after the pennies, and the pounds take care of themselves."_ The moral of the story is, If we as a society get complacent with the small things, the big things come in a lot easier. Like Trump, when he does something stupid we just think "Oh yea but it's Trump, he's going to do stupid things." and so it lessens the impact of what he's actually done. But like you said, convenience over privacy, I'd rather have aspects of my privacy invaded and be able to use the internet, than not be invaded and not use the internet at all. But in a perfect world, that shouldn't be a decision we have to make. Im not saying we are innocent in all this, we are complacent, and that's what allows all this to happen in the first place. This is all speaking hypothetically though. In reality the internet is so vast and so few people truly understand what happens behind it, that it can never truly be policed. so it's a mute point. However that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to make it as good as we can, right? ^^
Rioter Comments
: It does no more than what discord, or the xbox app, or basically any other program/app on your PC already does. It's not seeing what you're looking at, it's reading a name off a list of processes in the same way that discord knows what games you're playing.
Perhaps your answer though, reveals the actual problem? Let's be real, as an isolated issue, League reacting to our searches is a relatively small problem in the scale of things. Perhaps the greater problem is that we justify league doing this by saying "Ehhh everyone does it." When "Ehhh everyone does it." becomes the justification/defence for something, that's when we have a real problem. One of the big appeals of the internet is anonymity, I bet half of the people on the planet wouldn't use the internet if it broadcast their searches to everyone they knew. _(I'm not saying league takes away that anonymity, but the little programs like discord and league doing the small stuff, softens the blow for the big offenders like google and facebook.)_ Now i'm not saying it's our right to have complete anonymity, obviously if we use programs like facebook, we willingly accept the terms of service of that particular program, and such companies do need to analyse data _(within reason)_ in order to know how to improve. However! I do believe that these programs need to be self contained. Wether it's just reading a process off a list, or collecting images you post online, they should only be able/allowed to read information within their own app. i.e. If you search something on google, fair enough, google can collect that information for data analysis. BUT facebook shouldn't be able to, searching something on google has absolutely nothing to do with facebook, therefore that information should be blocked to the social media giant. If I like something on pinterest, I don't then wants adds for that on youtube, they are two different applications, and any data collection that happens, should _(in a perfect world)_ stay within that app. Likewise with steam, if you're playing a game through steam, that's fair enough that steam tells all your friends about it. HOWEVER, discord has no right to know that information. And if it wants to know it, it needs to ask. So if you type "Cheat engine" into the league client, then fair enough, league can decide what to do with that information. But league has no right to access google searches in any capacity without permission _(I've read the terms and conditions and (at least back then) it never mentioned anything like that.)_ as google searches have nothing at all to do with the actual function of the app. This is my view anyway. What do you reckon? Maybe we have to look less at the problem, but actually how we defend and view the problem, and that will reveal the actual issue.
: Happy New Year
Happy new year! {{sticker:sg-kiko}}
: 1v1
I think it would be a very interesting thing to see. I don't know how successful it would be though. Most people love the idea of facing off in a 1v1 and being the victor, however... A vast number of players seem to permanently be under the delusion that they are a lot better than they are. And in a 5v5 scenario it is very easy to keep that delusion afloat _"I am better than them, but they won cos they got ganks and I didnt"_, _"Ahri is 23/4/11, but that's only because she roamed bot and got those 2 early kills, its not my fault."_, _"We lost because my team is heavy."_ These are the lies we all tell ourselves to keep our own bubble afloat. There are so many factors that affect the game, that you often cant really determine with whom the majority of the blame lies, and its so much easier to spread it around the 4 other randoms, than it is to shoulder it yourself. _(which like everything in the game, is of course a clever design to keep people interested)_ I don't think many people could take the harsh realities of a permanent 1v1 mode. The sheer crushing truth that they are just as shit as everyone else would be a bitter pill to swallow for too many people. Once that bubble is popped, I wouldn't be surprised if people lose interest in the game a little. When you realise that you only win around 50/50 of your games and this time the blame is entirely on you... So I think it would have a very very limited lifespan as a mode, and may even have a negative effect on the population of league itself. So personally I think a 1v1 mode is something that people think they want, but don't ACTUALLY want. However in saying that, I vote yes. 1. Because why not. Sounds like a neat game mode for a bit of competitive fun, you could have some awesome map designs too. 2. It would be so juicy to see cocky SoB's brought crashing down to earth. 3. It'd be great laning practice where you can focus on certain things like CSing or harassing etc. in a controlled environment. So for people who arent in a bubble, practicing individual skills without having to worry about the rest of the game could be very beneficial. There are obvious drawbacks though. Support mains would feel very excluded from the game mode. It'd be no fun vsing a 500,000 mastery point Fiora main, as Bard or Sona. Even if you weren't support, it'd feel pretty shit if your main wasn't very good in a 1v1 situation. Also some champs like Kalista or Sol just couldn't play, literally half of Kalista's abilities _(including her ult)_ just wouldn't exist. So Kalista mains would never get to test their limits. And in a 1v1 situation Sol would be disadvantaged to the point of just not being fun. Depending on the rules _(is it til first blood? first tower? Is it a 50 minute base defence game?)_ you'd probably find that early game champs just dominated, and late game champs and their players just don't get the time to shine. But for those who are competitive and do enjoy that me against them play style, why not. For the sake of a vote i'll say yes. I probably wouldn't play it much myself _(I like my bubble)_, but for those who want it _(or who think they want it)_ why not.
Jklien1 (OCE)
: Can we please do something about these new 'champions' and 'reworked champions'????
Personally, I think Zoe is pretty balanced (and yes I was there when she came out, and I still didn't find her a problem then). Unlike so many other champions, she has to aim and land the abilities that give her that 1 shot potential. And they require a lot of setup if you want to use them effectively. Plus nothing she has (of any real threat) goes through minions. On top of that, she has no escapes. So assuming you have your wits about you, she's got a very generous amount of counterplay. Especially in comparison to older champs like Zed or Fizz that ultimately control the lane just by being in it. Pyke I don't think is that bad either. yea he's annoying, and gets some pretty free personal utility. But it's not like he cant be killed. And he doesn't bring a lot to the table in terms of actual supporting. So yea while the individual champ is annoying, he doesn't bring much to the team that cant be brought by other champs. The only thing he has that is actually purely unique to him, is his gold sharing ability. Other champs have pulls, other champs have dash/stuns, other champs have invisibility, other champs have grey heath regen, other champs have chain ult executes. So while he is pretty dangerous as a single champion, in terms of a team comp, he doesn't bring a lot of new things to the team. Kai'sa is strong late game, like many ADC's are supposed to be. But from what I see she isn't that much stronger than other ADC's. She is probably easier than some. But once they reach lategame, I don't think she shines that much more than others, at least not in the elo where I see her. Evelynn isn't too bad, purely because she can actually be killed, unlike the rest. She deals a lot of damage and comes out of nowhere, but id still rather vs her than Zed or many other assassins. The others you mentioned definitely err on the strong side though. I will admit, selfishly I thoroughly enjoy Swain being easy/strong though. Most of my champs require a lot of mental energy and focus, Azir/Sol/Taliyah/Kindred/Kalista etc. And its so nice to have a champ I can rely on like Swain, where you can just let go for a couple of games and relax while playing. Objectively, yea things come much easier to him than other champs. I probably have to put in twice the effort as Azir to get the same results as Swain. However, despite being marketed as a tactician, Swain's kit doesn't provide that much tactical diversity. When you're ahead, you wade into fights as a giant demon spamming Q and win. When you're behind, you wade into fights as a giant demon spamming Q and lose. Where as champs like Azir can adapt (with greater efficiency) to a far larger variety of situations and play around them better. Akali re-enters smoke too quickly, I couldn't even hit her with my targetable abilities because between the time where I saw her exist stealth, and I moved my mouse to her and pressed the button, she had entered stealth again. But like Evelynn, at least she sacrifices survivability for damage. Urgot and Aatrox definitely have too much damage for how survivable they are _(and i'm a lvl 7 Aatrox player, so when I say that, you know i'm not being bias)_. Urgot in particular, shouldn't have the damage he does for how hard he is to kill. Like Garen and Mundo. At least Aatrox though isn't easy, and does require a fair bit of mechanics to actually get to a point where you are that monster. And Irelia is just straight up fucked. I genuinely don't even know how to defend her. Even if I play her, I have no idea what's going on, everything she does is so fast I cant even follow it. She goes from a standstill to dashing round you faster than Barry Allen, 10000 blades flying everywhere. Sometimes theres a stun that happens somewhere within the chaos. And then someone is dead. She is the champ that has everything. Damage, Tankiness, mobility, Hard CC, Zoning, Soft CC, Anti-shield, etc. In my opinion of course. _(If someone can give me some tips on vsing irelia I would be very grateful.)_ And Neeko hasn't been around long enough to get a proper handle on her place within the game. When a champ comes out, its easier to learn how to play them than it is to learn how to play against them. So right now, theres a lot of people who have already played her enough to get good at using her. But we are all still figuring out how to play around her. So far though, her ult seems to have a really decent amount of counterplay. It's not like she can just pop it whenever, it takes some setup, and a solid chunk of time, part of which she is immobile for.
Nightjar (OCE)
: japanese or spanish Neeko sounds much better, if you disagree, fite me 1v1 aram.
I haven't heard Spanish, but Japanese sounds awesome. Im still not at the level where I can make sense of a lot of it. But from the little I do know, i'd assume that screwing up the grammar in Japanese the same way she does in english would still sound kinda normal and cute, instead of just being annoying xD
Nightjar (OCE)
: the problem with adding tenacity is that it reduces the impact of light zoning cc more than it affects hard lockdown. Hard lockdown CC such as snares, stuns, knockback/ups, tends to be a very effective stop gap when a bruiser or tank is trying to engage onto an immobile adc, albeit a high investment solution, they don't last long anyway and are designed to quickly peel or lockdown. Light zoning CC such as slows, silences, interrupts, grounded, and basically just slows, are designed to make landing skillshots, follow up cc, and positioning around a tank or bruiser easier, especially for low mobility adcs who have to rely on the support for peel and the bonus movespeed on their zeal based items to kite. Light zoning CC typically has a long duration but a low impact, and are a bit more plentiful in team fights but are important for a team's overall ability to peel. Tenacity is a very dangerous stat to mess with, if you've seen a few of the tenacity stack monsters that existed for some times on PBE you'd understand why Riot is very careful when adding tenacity to items or champions.
Maybe it could be tweaked to allow for that? Idk Like the difference between armour pen and lethality, or blind and disarm. Make a clear distinction about what is and isn't affected by Tenacity or whatever new name you wanna call it. Knockups suppression and stasis already aren't affected by Tenacity. If you're going to have exceptions, why not just go full hog and divvy up the CC into what can be reduced further and what cant. Maybe when the game used to be simpler, adding in more situationally specific shit wouldn't have been a good idea. But it's 2018 now and there's so many stats/stat modifiers/on-hit effects now, that its practically impossible to keep track of it all, especially in a team fight. In a team fight you're never going to mentally do the calculations of what happens if you have X tenacity, but get hit by Morgana's Q after being brittle from Ornn, but are also sleepy from Zoe's bubble. We have well past the point of in game clarity now, unfortunately. So adding yet another semi-similar-but-the-same-but-also-different stat, probably wouldn't be too much harm (as much as that pains me to say). Because while you don't want to have monsters like Garen who just cant be CCed, you also don't want tame CC just being a death sentence for squishier champs, like it often is currently. Even a medium+ slow will put most immobile champs in the grave now in many situations. What would you recommend to counteract how the Damage/MS creep affects CC potency?
: Talking about tenacity.
The damage in league has ramped up dramatically over the seasons. CC times haven't changed as much however. So in the past a Morgana Q was a movement impairing ability that put you at risk. Now, it's a death sentence, no two ways about it. The same with other abilities, things like Ahri's charm or Xerath's E gave the champ a little bit of CC to help land a few spells whilst in a brawl. Now, if you get hit by the charm, 7 times out of 10, you will be dead by the time it wears off, and 2 of the other 3 times it wears off and you're on so little HP that there's no way you can effectively retaliate. Even CC that was once just 'disruption' like Riven or Zac's kit, are now lethal, due to how little time it takes to 100-0 a champion. This is also partially due to MS creep, champions move at a far greater speed than they used to, so removing that movement capability further compounds the effectiveness of CC. So in all fairness, I don't see why tenacity shouldn't be added into the game in a slightly larger capacity. We should keep in mind through that hitting CC isn't always easy, and if you do hit it you** should** be rewarded with a window of opportunity. However, this opportunity shouldn't mean a free kill. This is my opinion anyway.
Catski (OCE)
: Something EVERYONE NEEDS to know about NEEKO
#Sexuality in League characters. Agreed with you in the sexuality part. Theres no need to complain or be over the moon. I think it fits her character to a T. And that's great. She's shy and curious and exotic, and the suggestively around her sexuality just adds to that air of mystery and curiosity. Filling her out more as a character. Just like Taric's supposed sexuality aids his character development. He's strong and muscly and _**extremely**_ camp, if he had 3 girls under his arm in his splash arts, it would just seem wrong and out of character. Likewise with Evelynn. If Eve was all about girls and couldn't care less about men, the whole impact of her character as the seductress would be diminished. Vi too, she suits being the tomboy 'lesbian', because that's how the image of her character was designed. Obviously Xayah/Rakkan's orientation too is highly key to their character. The only champ whose sexuality I have a problem with is Varus. You don't just pick a champ and random and just twist and mangle their storyline beyond recognition until you manage to fit two gay men into their body. It'd be fine if you wanted to make that story for a brand new character _(you could even have 3 seperate voice overs, it'd be awesome)_, but don't change characters that people already know and love the way they are. To be clear, I have no problem with a character being gay or straight or whatever, I have a problem with them taking an existing character and changing it just cos. It'd be no different than if they were suddenly like "Oh yea btw, Yasuo is trans." After all these years and all the people who are invested in the character, we thought we better tell you now, turns out everything you knew about him was a lie. Yasuo already has a set story, just like Varus did. You don't fuck with the story. If it doesn't aid the story, don't do it. Neeko fits the story. Thats good. People from all walks of life can appreciate that. _____________________________ #Fictional characters and how they DO affect us. I have to disagree with the last part of your statement. Fictional characters can highly affect us both individually and as a society. Think of a world without Batman or Superman, (or Pikachu). How different would that be _(for a start Marvel comics probably wouldn't even exist, or at least not be well known, and we damn well wouldn't have any Avengers movies)_. Superman was actually used to support the war effort in WWII, he inspired soldiers and civilians alike to do their best for their country. How instrumental has Wonder Woman been to inspiring young women? How has her existence affected various feminist movements? The UN actually officially named Wonder Woman an "Honorary Ambassador for the Empowerment of Women and Girls" _(before, ironically enough, the very people she empowered voted her be stripped of the title.)_. The character Spock inspired real people to become scientists, and do work that benefited the world, and one day may actually get us to other planets following the character's footsteps. How many people in the civilised world haven't seen or heard the word 'Pikachu'? What would the internet look like without our little yellow friend and everything he has inspired since his creation? Does the internet not affect us? Would modern Japan be the same? That little character deeply affects an entire country. > "character who in no way effects you" No one knows how the world will adopt a character. JRR Tokien wrote a book about wizards and dwarves. He never in his wildest dreams through that an entire country _(which had nothing to do with it at at the time)_ would adopt that story into their very essence of their nation. This is one of the reasons you don't just add crap into a characters story for no reason. They do affect us. And if the character is inaccurate or improperly represented because you 'just wanted' them to be X, then that decision affects us too **E.g.** If I were gay, I wouldn't want Varus being the poster-child for my community. What values would that bring? Varus' sexuality was clearly an afterthought! Its not a stretch to assume someone caught a bit too much SJW flak and though _"Shit, better appease these guys! We better make one of the champs gay real quick."_ Is that how you want the gay community to be viewed? As an afterthought to be appeased? Thats what adding random shit into a character 'just cos' does. They didn't even bother to change Varus' appearance or VO. Thats how little it meant to them. I would much rather be represented by someone like Neeko or Vi. They're cool, they're interesting, yea they don't hide that their orientation, but it also doesn't define them. Their sexuality neither restricts, nor defines who they are. It's not something to be ashamed or proud of, it's just how they are, and what they are is a badass enemy-team-killing machine. They have always been this way, and didn't bow to the pressures of society like Varus did. Thats the kind of character that is meaningful, and if they did catch the right eyes and bounce out into the world at large like Superman and Batman. I assume they'd have a far more beneficial impact than Varus. #TL;DR: This turned into a long post xD, but the moral of the story is: 1. Don't force fit things if they don't fit. 2. Don't underestimate the importance of fictional characters. 3. I like Neeko, she's pretty cool. _(still getting accustomed to the voice though.. opinion withheld for now)_
Riesu (OCE)
: Still possible to get Prestige Kai'Sa?
Unfortunately, you cant obtain the skin anymore through conventional means. But _(as it was just pointed out to me recently)_ they will be making a return into the game at a later stage: https://twitter.com/Mortdog/status/1069717611825360896 However, it is unlikely that the border will also be making a comeback, as borders don't seem to usually work that way. It may be possible to still obtain the skin through re-rolls in hextech crafting, but because of this post I would have my doubts about that: https://twitter.com/mortdog/status/1044646318767886336?lang=en He specifically says _"Getting the prestige Kai'sa skin won't be possible without paying somewhere."_ Seeing that re-rolling is free as long as you have some skin shards to spare. His comment would suggest that it cant be re-rolled. #**TL;DR:** You will be able to obtain the skin at a later date. If you are really desperate, try re-rolling your skin shards, but I cant promise that will work, and even if it does, the chances of getting the specific skin you want in RNG are low.
: Old School Gamemode
Unfortunately this is highly unlikely :( Riot has said that while they aren't opposed to the concept, they believe that the effort required to create it isn't worth it. They would rather use the time and manpower such a task would take, and spend it on other things like new skins/champs etc. (which is a fair point) https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2017/05/ask-riot-classic-mode/ However, if you want a ray of hope, they also said a very similar thing about butchers bridge not being worth the effort to bring back, and yet come back it did. https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2017/02/ask-riot-where-is-butchers-bridge/
Xuízunä (OCE)
: Cheers for that! Appreciate it :)
Xuízunä (OCE)
: Is it worth playing ranked now or wait for official season start?
Any rank you achieve now won't count for ether last season's rewards or next season's, but MMR gain should affect your placements still. So if you want to place higher when the new season does begin, you can still play ranked now to affect that chance.
slxw (OCE)
: Well to get the mastery you must have tokens / shards / essence / ... some of these can be bought. when I say that lvl 7 mastery is a joke, I say it because I know. I say it because I have it, I know its dumb luck because I'm b5, getting a few 's' scores is just going to happen. mastery lvl 7 is not an indication of a good player, nor per say is the persons rank, eg - " I have 46 lvl champs"
> tokens / shards / essence / ... some of these can be bought. I was sympathetic of your point at first, but now I can see this is a mindless rant. You're clutching at straws with this comment. You can buy chests, chests that when opened give you the possibility of getting a shard or blue essence. Both of which can be obtained freely and easily through playing the game. The one thing that requires you to get an S for, cannot be bought. You're talking through your teeth. You have it? Cool We all have Mastery 7 on multiple champs, and most of us like having it. Yea sometimes you get lucky and get the perfect situation and get an S. Sometimes you work damn hard and don't get one, and sometimes you work damn hard and do. No one has ever said that having a mastery 7 champion proves you're the best. It's a nice flair to show that you've played the champ enough to get lvl 5 and have continued playing long enough to get some S's. It's not a big deal. Yes it involves some luck, but no more or less than ranked. No more or less than winning games. Have a think about what Mastery 7 is supposed to actually be. Is it true 'mastery' of a champ? no of course not, then only a couple of people in the world would have it. So what is it? it's supposed to be a little reward for people who put time into a certain champion. Does it fulfil that role? Yes. Could the system for earning it be better? Yea probably. Is it hurting anyone? No.
Show more

Lord Sesshomaru

Level 10 (OCE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion