[5.13] Core AP Items Pass

**Note: These changes aren't on the PBE yet! But will on the PBE once we switch over to testing the new patch stuff.** TL;DR - We're changing AP Items! NLR is cheaper! More things give 80 AP! More things build out of NLR! Most things top out at 100 AP - but you'll still probably have the same amount of AP in your full build! **EDIT:** Okay, you guys usually don't outnumber me by this much when I make a post like this. Going to pass out - probably won't be able to respond to comments until the changes hit PBE and players start playing on them. **Rationale** Ability Power is a relatively easy thing to optimize in the current ecosystem and the current AP builds are a little more generic than I'd like. AP mages bring a mix of damage and utility but the AP items have accidentally converged around damaging AP builds far outpacing more utility or counter-centric ones. **Needlessly Large Rod and the '120 AP' Build** The crux of this issue is the fact that if you want a relatively high amount of AP - you were constrained to a fixed set of items that greatly synergize with each other due to the high amounts of base AP on them (Zhonya's, Ludens, Deathcap). These items also tend to be more gold efficient because they're behind the huge barrier of Needlessly Large Rod, in order to reward players for taking a power dip. As time has passed - this NLR has created some odd side effects - the strongest AP items also have terrific utility or potential, which places every other AP item in a semi-awkward spot. It's hard to justify a utility item over a build full of NLR items - especially since an NLR item gave something on the order of +52 / 78 more AP innately per slot after Deathcap or other potential multipliers. What we've seen is that because this particular combination is so favored - it heavily narrows the types of mage patterns to those that can best use this particular offensive combination, effectively pushing out more control oriented mage playstyles or sustained mage playstyles in favor of whatever kits work well with a large amount of raw AP and care about burst damage. This means that mages who have a core item or side item that don't contain the default 4 items are heavily unfavored relative to their counterparts. While a certain degree of optimization around the items will exist - the power gap between different AP styles really doesn't have to be on the order of 50-75 AP per slot in order to be meaningful. **What we're doing** Tactically, we're hitting the high end items in terms of AP while retouching and doing an update on the AP of most of the other items such that they compare more favorably to each other. Some items have been raised or lowered to 100 AP - while others have been lifted up to 80 Ability Power. We want to keep the overall amount of AP you get about the same at the end - but we want there to be more variations on the type items there - in case you need to deviate from a standard core. Here goes - It's a pretty big changelist but it's mostly a cleanup and tier adjustment pass. **Changelist** {{item:1026}} **Blasting Wand** **Cost:** 860 G --> 850 G {{item:1058}} **Needlessly Large Rod** **Cost:** 1600 G --> 1250 G **Ability Power: **80 AP --> 60 AP NLR being at such a high price / AP point means that almost any item that builds from NLR would have to have greater than 100 Ability Power on it when combined with any other Ability Power component. This proved to be a pretty huge constraint in using NLR as a stepping stone for certain items - going to retarget NLR as a smaller item. While this does have some implications on lane timing (You no longer need a double kill to get NLR first back, for example) - It was either this or inflate AP as a whole across the board. This has some... interesting ramifications in terms of the stability of mid lane purchases. {{item:3089}} **Rabadon's Deathcap** **Recipe Change:** NLR + Blasting Wand + Amplifying Tome **Total Cost:** 3300 G --> 3500 G **Ability Power UNCHANGED:** 120 AP **UNIQUE Passive:** 30% Ability Power Amp --> 35% Ability Power Amp Deathcap's change mostly revolves around keeping total final AP of the damage build the same - while being able to nerf the individual AP items to have more comparable numbers to each other. As Deathcap is *the* keystone I want a lot of AP item - we pushed the power here. {{item:3157}} **Zhonya's Hourglass** **Total Cost:** 3300 G --> 3000 G **Ability Power:** 120 Ability Power --> 100 Ability Power {{item:3285}} **Luden's Echo (Summoner's Rift)** **Total Cost:** 3100 G --> 3000 G **Ability Power:** 120 Ablity Power --> 100 Ability Power **Movement Speed:** 7% Movement Speed --> 10% Movement Speed Luden's is a terrifying item in terms of the general poke power it adds - Luden's probably needs a more solid identity that 'raw power' - so we've been pushing the item to be more and more about being mobility focused rather than spam spell focused. I suspect we'll eventually need to do more to the item but it'd most likely be more of a slow burn. {{item:3003}} **Archangel's Staff (Summoner's Rift)** **Recipe Change:** NLR + Tear of the Goddess + 1030 G **Total Cost:** 2700 G --> 3000 G **Ability Power:** 60 Base AP --> 80 Base AP Making more items build out of NLR in the hopes of expanding the high-tier AP space. AAA is definitely deserving of being one of the high tier AP slots, given its general growth pattern and the fact that it's attached to a quest in order to achieve maximum AP potential. {{item:3040}} **Seraph's Embrace (Summoner's Rift)** **Ability Power:** 60 Base AP --> 80 Base AP ...For completion's sake. {{item:3027}} **Rod of Ages (Summoner's Rift)** **Total Cost:** 2800 G --> 2700 G **Health:** 450 Base Health --> 300 Base Health **Mana:** 450 Base Mana --> 400 Base Mana **Passive:** 20 Health Growth / 200 Maximum Health UNCHANGED. **Passive:** 20 Mana Growth / 200 Maximum Mana --> 40 Mana Growth / 400 Maximum Mana **Passive:** 2 Ability Power / 20 Maximum Ability Power --> 4 Ability Power / 40 Maximum Ability Power Rod is currently leaning a bit too much towards favoring AP Heavies with the statline - while not really solving Mana / AP concerns for mages who want to pick it up. Going to adjust the item to more favor the Mana and Offensive statistics of this item, especially over time. {{item:3115}} **Nashor's Tooth** **Total Cost:** 2920 G --> 3000 G **Attack Speed:** 50% Attack Speed --> 40% Attack Speed **Ability Power:** 60 Ability Power --> 80 Ability Power We're also pushing more items up to compete in the 80 Ability Power range - While Nashor's is a fine purchase for people who already have strong on-hit procs - the ratio of Attack Speed to Spells favored these characters probably a bit too hard. Nashor's should be acceptable as a niche for certain mages that can use their autoattacks well - but also have decent ratios. _(I'm not being biased here at all. I don't know who you're talking about.)_ {{item:3116}} **Rylai's Crystal Scepter** **Recipe Change:** NLR + Amplifying Tome + Giant's Belt **Total Cost:** 2900 G --> 3000 G **Passive Updated** **Single Target:** 35% Slow for 1.5 seconds --> 40% Single Target Slow for 1.5 seconds **Instant AoE:** 15% Slow for 1.5 seconds --> 40% Slow for 1 second **DoT or Multi-hit:** 15% slow for 1.5 seconds --> 20% Slow for 1 second **Summoned Minions (NEW):** 20% Slow for 1 second. **Note:** If a spell fits in more than one category - it'll generally use the weakest slow. Rylai's is currently good in a few scenarios, namely - do you have a spammable single target spell and a train pattern - a large part of this is the fact that the AoE / DoT portions of the slow are so weak in comparison to the single target slow. Changing the tactic here to make those slows have less overall duration rather than penalizing the direct effect. This is a very powerful push in terms of Rylai's overall power - but we'll be looking at modifying and cleaning up of the slow rules as well either now or in the near future. _(Also added a self-only freeze particle effect so you can watch everyone become ice cubes when you're slowing them. FOR CLARITY.)_ {{item:3136}} **Haunting Guise** **Total Cost:** 1480G --> 1500 G Wait for it... {{item:3151}} **Liandry's Torment** **Recipe Change:** Haunting Guise + Blasting Wand **Total Cost:** 2900 G --> 3000 G **Ability Power:** 50 Base AP --> **80** Base AP Liandry's Torment is designed to be able to fit as a High Health / Low Resistance shredder (hence the combination of health damage + flat penetration). However, the lower AP on the item frequently meant your kit didn't actually work. Aggressively pushing the power of this build to be able to compete with the more immediate damage type builds - like proc builds. {{item:3152}} **Will of the Ancients** **Spell Vamp** 20% Spell Vamp --> 0% Spell Vamp **New UNIQUE Passive:** Your spells and abilities heal you for 15% of the damage dealt, calculated BEFORE your opponent's resistances. 33% effect for AoE Spells. You need so many things to get a Spell Vamp build to work. You have to be resistant enough to not get bursted. You have to deal a sufficient amount of raw damage in order to heal. You probably need to be ahead to outscale the opponent's resistances. You need a ton of base damage. Therefore - this change is trying to reduce the number of dependencies needed in order to 'turn on.' You won't need Pen to heal from this item on champions. Spell Vamp builds are fairly problematic to control once they get rolling - so they tend to be pretty binary. The hope here is that there's a lower spell vamp value and less healing generally in exchange for not needing so much to get started. {{item:3165}} **OmNomNomicon ** **Recipe Change:** Codex + Idol + Amplifying Tome **Total Cost Unchanged** Wanted to increase the number of potential purchase options at the ~1200 G level. I'm attempting to make Codex + Book or Wisp + Book potentially attractive choices compared to NLR, especially on your first back. You'll get more interim power than the NLR - at the slight cost of strongly telegrahing what you're going to build and locking yourself into a build. It's mostly an experiment to see if players like having this kind of choice between 800 + 400 component vs. ~1200 mid-tier. It makes the recipe a bit bloated but... yeah. {{item:3174}} **Athene's Unholy Grail** **Recipe Change:** Codex + Chalice + Amplifying Tome **Total Cost Unchanged** See _Omnomnomicon_ Above. {{item:3135}} **Void Staff** **Total Cost:** 2295 G --> 2500 G **Ability Power:** 70 Ability Power --> 80 Ability Power Void Staff's raw efficiency is pretty high compared to some of the other items on the list. While % Penetration will always be a great multiplier for damage for any damage oriented mage - you don't really need it to also be such a great source of Ability Power. This pushes Void Staff's efficiency more in line with some of the other items with comparable multipliers. Also adding a bit of AP to ensure that players end up at roughly the same amount of AP they did pre-patch. **Edit:** Okay - so these are testing well enough internally - and syncing up with ManWolfAxeBoss - NLR will be making its return to CS and TT. **Alternate Map Items** {{item:1058}} **Needlessly Large Rod** Now is available on TT and CS at its reduced price point of 1250. {{item:3090}} **Wooglet's Witchcap** **Recipe Change:** Seeker's Armguard + Needlessly Large Rod **Total Cost**: 3540 --> 3500 The recipe is quite a bit harder - so a minor cost decrease to the other Deathcap value seemed okay. {{item:3285}} **Luden's Echo (Crystal Scar)** Now just uses the SRU Luden's Echo. {{item:3003}} **Archangel's Staff (Crystal Scar)** **Recipe Change:** NLR + Tear of the Goddess **Total Cost**: 2700 --> 3000 **Base AP**: 60 --> 80 Basically a mirror of the SRU one - but keeps the tear stacking rate of crystal scar.
Share
Now Viewing: Rioter Rundown
Any idea for AD items getting changes like this? I like the major idea, but I do not like 3 item build paths outside of Triforce too. WotA also concerns me with Vlad. He's already really strong atm.
> [{quoted}](name=Lostbob117,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:05:38.315+0000) > > Any idea for AD items getting changes like this? I like the major idea, but I do not like 3 item build paths outside of Triforce too. > > WotA also concerns me with Vlad. He's already really strong atm. He gets less total Spellvamp (20% --> 15%) - but it's a bit more reliable.
Do you think some of these build paths can get cleaned up a bit? Like I said, 3 components is a pain imo. X.X
Eventually - we'll probably look towards cleaning some of them up but it's a thing where I want to evaluate whether or not this accomplishes my goals directionally.
3 component recipes just bother me a lot personally.
> [{quoted}](name=Luggage,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:08:52.248+0000) > > 3 component recipes just bother me a lot personally. I know - it bugs me too. It gets kind of constraining towards the end game to feel like your options are becoming less efficient. However, you get a 50 AP bump when finishing Morello - and that's kind of rough. If I had time to do another component item, it'd probably be some kind of upgrade from Fiendish Codex (Codex + Book) = 50 AP, 10% CDR item + Lane Passive) thing to smooth it out. However - I'd like to prove out this concept first before deep diving it some more.
what if rabaddons built out of double needlessly large rods? thatd be pretty sweet IMO
While totally sweet - that means that Mid gets snowbally as hell. :P The losing champion wouldn't really have a good path into Deathcap and would be forced into a utility build - which would probably shrink the pool of mage champions down to hyperscaling utility champions.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:12:35.942+0000) > If I had time to do another component item, it'd probably be some kind of upgrade from Fiendish Codex (Codex + Book) = 50 AP, 10% CDR item + Lane Passive) thing to smooth it out. However - I'd like to prove out this concept first before deep diving it some more. Why don't you increase the AP on Codex to like 45 from 30 or something? That would basically remove the extra Amp Tome from Athene's and Morello and it helps shrink larger AP jumps with things like Nashor's and Banner of Command. The only issue I could see is it might mess with Frostqueen and Twin Shadows but I'm not sure if you guys think supports would be okay with getting that extra AP. It would likely need a price increase since it would compete with Blasting Wand pretty heavily.
I actually did initially. It's just that Tome and Wisp became impossible to buy on first back for a lot of characters which made all their upgrades basically unbought across tests.
new
With Spellvamp as a stat being removed from WoTA, will we also see changes to Hextech Revolver and Hextech Gunblade?
I have some thoughts in this space - but I wanted to do an isolated Core AP pass. I do have some ideas for Gunblade though. I'd remove the lifesteal and spellvamp and essentially convert to a global damage steal from all sources of damage - which I think fits better the concept of Gunblade entirely. So like No Lifesteal No Spellvamp Unique Passive: You heal 12% of the damage from ALL sources of damage you deal, including items. Which creates some interesting synergizes with characters with strong on-hit magic damage and procs.
new
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:15:00.769+0000) > > I have some thoughts in this space - but I wanted to do an isolated Core AP pass. > > I do have some ideas for Gunblade though. I'd remove the lifesteal and spellvamp and essentially convert to a global damage steal from all sources of damage - which I think fits better the concept of Gunblade entirely. > > So like > > No Lifesteal > No Spellvamp > Unique Passive: You heal 12% of the damage from ALL sources of damage you deal, including items. > > Which creates some interesting synergizes with characters with strong on-hit magic damage and procs. So let's say that an iteration of Gunblade similar to this one enters a testing phase. Would it also receive the penalty for AoE- and DoT-based sources of damage?
DoTs aren't penalized by Spell Vamp currently - but the AoE penalty would most likely still apply, yes.
Would that affect Ignite as well? I remember how a long time ago damage amps in the game used to affect Ignite, but stopped, lowering poppy/vlad/swain's pick rate.
Uncertain. Still pondering on the Spell Vamp exact details so I'm not really sure. It feels like it should - but that's just because currently it feels like Gunblade is kind of a catchall - 'I have no idea what you're doing - but it sounds like you need leech.' item.
I love how the new spell vamp effect on WotA reads but it just reminds me of how Swain and Irelia's ults used to heal for their base damages pre-resistances and how that got nerfed very fast. Not sure if the effect nowadays would be similar, but if not, I wouldn't mind seeing those two's ults get a similar pass.
Man - I remember those days. The thing I'm hoping for on WoTA is basically that, maybe it's a fair effect if you pay a bunch of gold for it specifically to sustain in a team fight - rather than itemize defense / offense and get that team fight for free (in the case of Irelia/Swain.) I can't quite be certain about that - but that's the hope.
Since you're talking about Gunblade, what about another hybrid item? What are you current thoughts/plans in regards to Rageblade? it kind of sits in a wierd AP/Attack Speed place but then has a pickaxe no AP wants. I fooled around with it some on Azir during URF and it felt like a fit but I'm not sure where you would push it to differentiate it from Nashor's.
I really dislike hybrid items personally. The more hybrid items that exist that are good - the weaker hybrid characters have to be innately in terms of their champion kits. Put it this way, if a hybrid item exists that is merely efficient - then it's not particularly attractive to hybrid characters compared to other AP items. So it has to be super efficient on the hybrid character compared to other options. However - once this happens, that means that the power spike from a single item that Hybrid characters you get can get crazily high - so then we nerf their ratios to compensate. The end result of this is that less items are viable on hybrid characters because they are now balanced around having two crazy efficient items in their inventory. That said - this is just the history of hybrid items. It could be that we're making both hybrid items and hybrid characters completely incorrectly.
Oh and does WotA passive work with Smite?
Yes. Basically, the concept I was going for was 'Super Spell Vamp.'
Will DoTs with Rylai's apply only a one second slow from the time of application, or a 1 second slow refreshing for each tick?
1 second slow refreshing for each tick.
Awesome, my buddy {{champion:63}} is safe :)
FLAMING ICE PARTICLES.
I have a single question in terms of Luden's; If you say that it's an item more suited for poke mages, why does it come with such a high movement speed boost? From my experience, poke mages give up mobility for long ranges and zone control, which Luden's entirely offsets by both giving said mages higher poke power AND improving their mobility. Why is that acceptable?
To be fair, it might not be in the long run. However, currently Luden's is pretty much a giant AP ratio on a stick for your spells - and so I want to see if some kind of identity for it can exist with its current model. I will admit, Luden's is a concept I have to be particularly careful around - since I was fairly fond of the DFG design. The thing that I'm focused on amplifying current patterns rather than remaking them - as we've seen far too little of their actual identities to know what is particularly problematic (it's all been hidden under a giant burst AP damage blanket.)
I just tend to find that the %MS on Luden's has invisibly pushed up the MS of several mages ahead of their competition, not severely, but they do feel safer now that they have 395 MS rather than 370. That does put them on comparable footing with their natural enemy, bruisers and assassins, so I'm not sure how to feel about its effect in the long run. I rather like the concept of Luden's passive, a Shiv that's accessible to mages is a really nice way to give someone better waveclear, for example, as well as stronger poke, but it's just the passive effect of increased MS that's attached to the item which bothers me. You've managed to keep the DFG design and feel with the Shiv passive, but I do think the MS needs to go (to another item, definitely) and be replaced with something just as beneficial. I have no suggestions as to what it may be, but the change from 7% to 10% make me afraid it'll tilt even further into empowering poke casters, which pre-rework Nidalee proved to be, well, not quite my definition of fun. I would much rather it had some way to round out poke mages (5% CDR maybe?) rather than make them even harder to chase down. That's my 2 cents on the matter, at least.
I can actually see that being realistic in the long run - that Luden's might need to be cadence driven (CDR) instead of Movement Speed driven (MS) - though that kind of directional shift on the item is a little outside the scope I wanted to work at. It's hard to evaluate Luden's right now - because it's essentially just yet another AP multiplier with no particular synergies - and so I'd like to try to clean that up a bit first before looking at its impact on the type of mages you're describing.
Wasn't Luden's originally meant to replace DFG, though? Especially in terms of ap assassins centered around mobility like {{champion:103}} {{champion:84}} {{champion:7}} {{champion:105}} etc? If you took away the mobility wouldn't that put these champs in essentially the same spot right after DFG was removed, essentially being forced to build like a burst mage (I do feel there is a slight difference between burst mage and ap assassin) or a more utility-focused champ?
> [{quoted}](name=Niqolette,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00020000000000000002,timestamp=2015-06-23T15:41:32.027+0000) > > Wasn't Luden's originally meant to replace DFG, though? Especially in terms of ap assassins centered around mobility like {{champion:103}} {{champion:84}} {{champion:7}} {{champion:105}} etc? If you took away the mobility wouldn't that put these champs in essentially the same spot right after DFG was removed, essentially being forced to build like a burst mage (I do feel there is a slight difference between burst mage and ap assassin) or a more utility-focused champ? Luden's was made to ensure that there was a multitude of NLR upgrades. In that way, it's a replacement. However - I really don't think that it was meant to be a 1:1 item replacement for the characters that use it. That said, switching from an MS model to a CDR model wouldn't necessarily make any of the champion's you listed more utility focused - there's not a whole ton of utility on them to speed up. Fizz / Leblanc become differently mobile with shorter recast windows - while Ahri gets to add poke and fishing to her toolset - as well as a shorter ult cooldown. Overall - the mobility of these characters would simply shift from raw movement - to more of a 'my escape / engage comes up more frequently or twice a fight'. Akali's really the only champion who doesn't make full use of CDR and would much prefer the MS - due to energy.
Well Teemo just skyrocketed into insanity with the nashors and liandry buffs... yay.
10% less Attack Speed. 500% more terrifying. HAIL TEEMO. I'll get someone to keep an eye out on that guy actually.
The cost reduction to {{item:1058}} looks like it'll give high-scaling mages much more of a breather in mid lane, especially compared to assassins who usually get to recall much sooner for cheaper items. On the flipside, champions who usually itemize for triple-NLR builds are going to scale a little worse into the late-late game, even with the buff to {{item:3089}}'s AP amplification. The 20% CDR + AP item recipes also look a bit iffy, and I think might risk filling up mages' inventories too fast. Here are some questions regarding these changes: 1. Now that NLR is much more affordable, would it be a possibility for it to build out of {{item:1026}}, and for Rod to be an {{item:1052}} upgrade? Previously, one of the big reasons for why super-large basic items were kept in basic tier was because they were meant to encourage players to hold out on their gold for a massive power spike; is this still true after this update? 2. Will {{item:3116}} still have a {{item:1011}} in its recipe? I imagine the NLR is meant to just replace Blasting Rod here. 3. Are there any plans to change the stats on {{item:3151}} in a manner similar to the {{item:3071}} update? Even with the improved stats, the squishy-killing flat penetration on Liandry's conflicts with its current-health burn, which is particularly effective against tanky champions, and that same issue is what caused Black Cleaver to receive a redo. While the reworked {{item:3001}} is meant to be the AP bruiser equivalent to TBC, it was also iceboxed due to it leaving some niches empty. Would Liandry's be a potential candidate for a poke-oriented MR shred item? 4. Do the changes to {{item:3152}} also mean items like {{item:3145}} and {{item:3146}} will also receive changes to their spell vamp? 5. How do you feel about the situation with {{item:3165}} and {{item:3174}}? Both are extremely similar in a lot of respects (they're both cheap, easily accessible AP items that also give lots of CDR and mana regen), and historically one's always ended up more popular than the other because of how close they are. Going back to Abyssal Scepter's rework, are there plans to change Athene's to be a stronger MR option for mages? 6. From a gameplay perspective, how do you feel about purely stat-focused items, like Rabadon's, {{item:3135}} or {{item:3027}}? Items like these work just by just giving the player more raw power, rather than giving them gameplay-changing passives or actives, and some of them, like Deathcap and Void Staff, tend to be picked on AP champions regardless of their intended playstyle or counter-build. Are they items you'd like to change in the long term, a necessary evil, or positive overall for the item roster?
> Previously, one of the big reasons for why super-large basic items were kept in basic tier was because they were meant to encourage players to hold out on their gold for a massive power spike; is this still true after this update? It's still true after this. NLR took a dip in its personal efficiency - its just that the power has been pushed into its upgrades rather than the item itself. Since offensive items are typically pro-active rather than reactive - having a piecemeal build of these items simply encourages snowballing and closely edging out your opponent - rather than taking risks. It's about recognizing that the massive power spike comes from Rabadon's (or Zhonyas, Rylais, AAA, etc.) rather than the component in and of itself - and thus the item still has to stand as a barrier against edging your opponent out. > Rylai's Recipe Yes. I knew I missed something there. Editing the original post. > Even with the improved stats, the squishy-killing penetration on Liandry's conflicts with its current-health burn, which is particularly effective against tanky champions. This assumes that Liandry's is supposed to punish tanks. It's intent is to punish health stacking - which is why it has a Flat MR shred on it - to punish disporportionately high health / low MR builds - especially characters that will attempt to rush several raw health items in a row (Cinderhulk into Righteous Glory, for example.) Liandry's essentially says that, if you're relying on your base MR to amplifying your Health - I'm going to take all of that away. > Spellvamp I didn't want to do that pass right now - I wanted to focus on Core AP items - but I have a couple of things in mind. > Omnomnomicon vs. Athene's. This one is difficult for me - but I'm not tackling that problem right at this moment. My data (from pro teams and item purchase rates in general) says that people do tend to be split on which item is better and they do vary their decision on this point. Since my goal was to do a light pass to break some of the existing trends - I'm not going to deep dive this and potentially cause more trouble than its worth. > General Stat Stick Items RoA is interesting because it adds some kind of time investment into your build - which will change the tempo of your play. In general, while it looks like a stat stick item - I think it does add some timing variance and pressure to completion - which is nice. Deathcap is useful to signal whether or not you are driving down a pure damage focus or a utility focus build. Void Staff, however, gets into trickier territory for me. This item reads mostly as 35% more magic damage - with no real reactions based on the opponent. However, whenever I've tested it out as being a raw magic resistance counter - players naturally responded by stacking pure health instead - knowing that a relative cheap item would void most of the MR purchases. Still puzzling over this one personally.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:29:07.231+0000) > > Since offensive items are typically pro-active rather than reactive - having a piecemeal build of these items simply encourages snowballing and closely edging out your opponent - rather than taking risks. Wouldn't this also cause snowballing in damage-versus-damage scenarios? If two AP champions face off in mid lane and one gets a kill, thereby earning enough to get a NLR while the other can only afford a Rod or something similar, wouldn't that make it harder for that second champion to catch up in their build? Alternatively, should their focus shift towards counter-building against the winning opponent, such as with a {{item:3028}}? Currently, a lot of damage-oriented classes tend to build purely towards damage and only tank up later on (with the exception of ROA on some champions and {{item:3157}}, which is both an extremely good offensive and defensive pick), which limits the amount of counter-building those classes can do. Is this something you'd like to change in the future, or something you think is healthy for the game (e.g. because it would prevent snowballing mages or assassins from becoming harder to kill)? > [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:29:07.231+0000) > > This assumes that Liandry's is supposed to punish tanks. It's intent is to punish health stacking - which is why it has a Flat MR shred on it - to punish disporportionately high health / low MR builds - especially characters that will attempt to rush several raw health items in a row (Cinderhulk into Righteous Glory, for example.) Liandry's essentially says that, if you're relying on your base MR to amplifying your Health - I'm going to take all of that away. Wouldn't the lack of resistances be a punishment in itself, though? If a champion plays Munchkin with their defensive items and min-maxes in favor of health, armor or MR, should the onus be on counter-counter-itemization, which would punish such a stilted build, or should it be on the champion itself, who would perform sub-optimally? Basically, should inefficient defensive builds punish themselves via their own inefficiency, or should they offer opponents options to punish them hard with specialized items? Void Staff also ties into this: would it be better to have an item that counters enemies harder and harder as they build more and more of a certain stat, or would it be better to punish over-stacking directly, such as with diminishing returns on that stat (currently armor and MR both work as a linearly-scaling multiplier to health)? What would be the tradeoffs with either option?
> Wouldn't this also cause snowballing in damage-versus-damage scenarios? If two AP champions face off in mid lane and one gets a kill, thereby earning enough to get a NLR while the other can only afford a Rod or something similar, wouldn't that make it harder for that second champion to catch up in their build? Yes - in the scenario that you describe - if they manage to kill and farm enough to hit the NLR breakpoint, then they are definitively ahead. However, if you make wand build from book - they actually get ahead from advantages much smaller than that - because a piecemeal build can edge you out much faster. So, you are definitely right that in the NLR case - the NLR mage comes out ahead and does snowball in that case. However, in the component piecemeal build up case - he gets that edge from any small increment of gold - rather than a large one contigent on kills. The other facet of this is that for certain key items (Deathcap, for example) it takes all three primary AP items to forge it - therefore for certain key items - we can choose to blunt this effect if we think the item is a required capstone. > Is this something you'd like to expand on, or something you think is healthy for the game (e.g. because it would prevent snowballing mages or assassins from becoming harder to kill)? It's a little hard to parse what you're saying here since there's a lot of ideas going on at once. In general - counterbuliding is something that I'd like to explore - but specifically lane counter-building is something that is really tricky as there isn't much of a line between 'lane counter-building' and 'the counterbuild is actually the best default build' (See: Abyssal Scepter) It's an interesting concept to explore - there's a lot of potential execution pitfalls to be wary of, however. > Wouldn't the lack of resistances be a punishment in itself, though? If a champion plays Munchkin with their defensive items and min-maxes in favor of health, armor or MR, should the onus be on counter-counter-itemization, which would punish such a stilted build, or should it be on the champion itself, who would perform sub-optimally? It actually highly depends on the champion whether or not said build would be sub-optimal. HP --> Damage scaling champions for example - are building a health munchkin - not for total effective defense - but for total effective damage. Likewise, HP --> Healing champions are guilty of the same effect. Liandry's is basically a recognition that you don't really need to build Health and MR to actually negate magic damage. We've seen enough occurrences in the past where Health was in a state where simple Health rushes would dominate large portions of the game. > would it be better to have an item that counters enemies harder and harder as they build more and more of a certain stat, or would it be better to punish over-stacking directly, such as with diminishing returns on that stat (currently armor and MR both work as a linearly-scaling multiplier to health)? What would be the tradeoffs with either option? IMO - it's generally better to have a hard-counter item rather than punishing over-stacking. This is due to the fact that you actually generally don't want to punish over-stacking too hard. When you aggressively punish over-stacking - what you reduce the decision tree into is 'cherry pick the best defense option' from each of the categories. Since this is *already* true due to the multiplicative nature of builds - it rapidly condenses the pool of available items into a tiny fraction of itself - because when the choice is choose ONE out of N - it's a very very easy problem to solve. Incidentally - this is also why Liandry's has a slow clause attached to it - to enable a full kite and burn build rather than just be an item about specific counters.
Love the changes! One question - how does the new Will of the Ancients passive work with on-hit effects like Elise's new empowered Spider Form AAs?
If it didn't work with Spell Vamp before - it won't now.
I have to say I like these changes very much. A few weeks ago I made a post on the regular boards explaining my desire for more item diversity especially because some items suffer from a permutation of stats which make them much more unfavorable than others. While I like that the general AP amount of items have been compressed to a closer scale I do not believe that this will foster a greater diversity of builds for mages(which is what I wish for). In all likelyhood we'll still see the same Manareg(Nomicon/athene's), Boots, high AP triplet, Voidstaff builds barring one or two changes when playing champions like Kassadin, Cassio, AP Kog or mages who do not have to manage mana like Vlad or Rumble. Nevertheless I like these changes and feel they are a step in the right direction only that I feel these changes could have been even more radical but that is likely a bit too much to ask for (just like my hope for a lot more items ^_^).
There's definitely more we can do on this front from a component / gold and items standpoint but this is a fairly light pass as I didn't really want to disrupt the ecosystem too much. There's a particularly set build that I want to break on the high AP triplet. Then again, this also buffs every non Manareg, Boots, High AP triplet, Void Staff build - so at the very least, alternative playstyles aren't so far behind the curve as the primary one. However, before I go farther in this direction - I do want to validate some of my hypothesis in that it's the right direction before planning more sweeping changes.
What will happen to vlad? That WOTA might make him a little unbearable{{champion:8}} {{champion:8}} {{champion:8}} EDIT: what will happen to {{champion:84}} with the spellvamp changes as well
It might. However, he'll have less Spell Vamp overall - Kind of want to see how it shakes out before he goes nuts. Gunblade changes will probably wait though until after we see the net effects of this pass.
Are we going to see AP increases on Triforce and Iceborne Gauntlet due to Sheen? Maybe up to 40 AP? And I'm also curious about Frostqueen's Claim and Banner of Command. If 60 AP is okay for them to better fit in as "Support Items" I can pick up for some AP as a support, then could Frostqueen's get a bump up to 60 from 50 AP?
Probably not. I wanted to focus on the Core AP items that I see heavy AP mages using - rather than the other scattered AP items that exist.
I hope you guys are keeping a really close eye on Vlad with those WoTA changes since he's already borderline OP.
I'm actually kind of terrified of Rylai's AoE slow on him but definitely agree that he's getting more powerful in multiple axis.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=000d0000,timestamp=2015-06-18T02:50:59.673+0000) > > I'm actually kind of terrified of Rylai's AoE slow on him but definitely agree that he's getting more powerful in multiple axis. Ye that's another problem, Rylai's currently is really only used by people that use it really well and they make it obnoxiously effective while everybody else doesn't really buy it. Making it better on everybody might make the abuse cases extremely frustrating.
Yeah - I'd like to watch this for a while. I have the levers to tune the item if I need to because I can easily adjust the slow percentages (or most likely, adjust the durations). As far as the abuse cases - that's definitely true but there's some changes to the slow system that made me more confidence to basically buff the hell out of the item.
Speaking of levers and items, do you guys remember which champs you nerfed because of item X,Y, or Z so you can unnerf them now that those items are being changes?
To be perfectly honest - I don't work on live balance. I know we do on occasion - but there are so many things that get organically balanced around each other over time that root cause of buff / nerf tends to fade very very quickly with patches.
new
Wouldn't that just leave the item good for those for used to be able to abuse it and bad for everyone else?
True - but I'm looking to expand the pool of champions that can abuse it. Basically, if we can tune it such that it's only good on the champions that can abuse it - but now there's also a bunch of AoE mages that can 'abuse' it - it means that we now have an item that's actually competitive on a large pool of champions. Basically - trying to get it to 'abusive' on large pool of champions - then slowly balance so that we end up with a larger group of champions than before that like the item.
This looks amazing and I can't wait to see this on live. Really nice to see Spell Vamp and Liandry's being worked on.
Actually, i had some questions. How do you feel these changes will affect Cassiopeia and Veigar? Are you hoping to push WotA into being more of a general buy? Do you think a perpetual 40% slow, like what Cassiopeia can do, will be agonizing to deal with? Also, how do items like Rage Blade and Hextech Gunblade fit into this?
> How do you feel these changes will affect Cassiopeia and Veigar? Cassie is already scary - and will likely be scarier. > WoTA It's less so pushing WoTA into being a more general buy as not requiring secondary items along with WoTA to make it function. Like, currently with WoTA - you pretty much need a Void Staff eventually, otherwise WoTA stops functioning entirely in fights due to the MR penalty. It's trying to reduce how many items WoTA locks you into, etc. > Do you think a perpetual 40% slow, like what Cassiopeia can do, will be agonizing to deal with? We'll actually be evaluating slow rules soon as we've been increasingly unhappy with them but also feel like we're unable to put any slows of significance because of the stacked case. > Rage Blade and Hextech Gunblade They don't fit in currently at the moment. Just doing a pass on Core AP.
Speaking of Gunblade. I have a quick question! What will happen with Hextech revolver because that gives spell vamp and WotA no longer has a Spell Vamp percentage from the item.
Revolver won't change. The WoTA's change basically converts that 12% Spell Vamp into 15% of 'Super Spell Vamp' that ignores opponent resistances.
I don't really see how this diversifies the possible builds for AP Itemization tbh. Imo those who built RoA will still buy it, and those who built Luden/Deathcap will still buy them too. On the other hand, I do see how it will "stealth nerf" snowbally champ who can just kill you once and then come back with a NLR, at which point your whole lane is lost. Hopefully it'll also veer off a bit of the that power some midlaners with high AP ratios are perceived to have. I've always seen NLR as the "midlane BFS" : If you get enough gold you come back with it and dominate the lane if your opponent didn't manage to farm as well as you did. Only NLR is an even worse offender because most of the items it builds into have only one other component which isn't necessarily that strong to begin with. Look at Luden, a frequent first/second item rush : Aether Wisp isn't bad by any stretch of the imagination but compared to a NLR? You're done, mate. So overall it looks good. Most likely some of the number tweaks will lead to some really nasty combos (already can see Rylai being quite oppressive on Cho) but I think it's great to work around the snowball in the early game which can be really frustrating sometimes.
> I don't really see how this diversifies the possible builds for AP Itemization tbh. Imo those who built RoA will still buy it, and those who built Luden/Deathcap will still buy them too. I actually agree that we might need to go harder on this direction - but the reason I'm doing a light pass instead of something fairly heavy is that I really want to see if I like the overall direction on the game. There's some rough bits (the triple components) that I can't smooth with the time that I have (and there's a serious gap in AP/CDR without Mana) but I'd like to take this step by step. > (already can see Rylai being quite oppressive on Cho) His 'E' is an AoE spell isn't it? Eeeeugh. Well - I guess it's really no worse than Frozen Mallet.... I think? *hides*
Already strong champions that are buffed with these changes: Rumble Cass Vlad Kog Ekko Champs to look out for with these changes: Velkoz Swain Ahri Karma Anivia Honourable Mentions: Mordekaiser Karthus Malzahar Corki Singed [EDIT] Teemo Zyra - Specifically didn't add Zyra because in mid lane she's not really viable, and as support she's only good in solo Q. Deserves to be on the list though.
Great list - I'll forward it to live so they can keep an eye on things.
Hey, Xyph, I used to post on the NA forums a lot, you and I had a few discussions in my threads. Just wanted to bring something up. I was talking to some Rioters last year and they said they'd love getting my feedback on PBE matters, which I've done, but I haven't been able to tell if you guys have seen my threads. I shot an email off to the guys who I talked to about giving feedback, but they never responded. I love doing analysis and helping you guys out, but I don't want to spend hours and hours doing that if it's not going to get seen. Is there anyway I can talk to you guys further about this? [EDIT] Also, is it possible that my email got lost, or is the no response kind of the answer? I can shoot another one off if need be, I just assumed it was the latter.
I have no idea who you got in contact with - or what the steps are on this point. Sorry about that - just not my forte. I did manage to forward your list to FeralPony who's my direct line to live balance - I'll also poke him to look at this thread - but that's about all I can do at the moment.
{{champion:68}} How do you think it's going to affect him? (pls no gut)
He'll probably get stronger because we buffed all his core items. Apologies in advance.
Riot: Yeah we buffed all the items of a tier 1 champion without planning for any changes to said tier 1 champion, so expect him to become perma ban tier since we didn't plan for that when we thought about these changes in the first place. Just really shows how terrible your balance team is if you do changes without thinking it's consequences and how it can break some champions into a overpowered tier.
Imagine a world in which, every time we made changes, we pre-emptively nerfed everyone who we thought benefited from the changes. Would this actually be a better world? Not particularly. Chasing Perfect Balance in every moment is not only an unattainable goal - but often crushes the desire to try things among the playerbase. Hey, we buffed a bunch of items that Rumble could potentially use - but btw, don't play him - because even if you've correctly identified that these buff Rumble - we're going to nerf the hell out of him so it's pointless to experiment. Don't even pick him up. It also usually leads to worse Balance overall - you're spending most of your time trying to balance based on incomplete data. You begin to chase shadows most of the time - rather than looking at the actual game and what the changes actually do. Let's not think about what you'd do to the existing Rumble population who never wanted the item changes in the first place and who were perfectly fine with Rumble to begin with. In the long run, once players have experimented with the items and his power level has settled into a good place - that's generally a time to make adjustments if necessary. Otherwise, it's just a train of 'I know this sounds nice for you - but don't even bother touching it.' In the end, it's about weighing what the likely expected value from a set of changes are. The AP build has converged onto one set of items due to the introduction of Luden's. Okay, let's break this chain up. The probable consequences are that a lot of Manaless AP's go up (due to the push on Liandry/Rylai) while a lot of AP bruisers go down. What's the value of this compared to re-adding possible utility options in the mid-lane in this current environment? Does a particular individual champion gets strong (Yes, Elise in particular.) Will he/she absolutely warp the game? (Stifles jungle picks a little bit but in the interim, other systems like pick/ban can generally stifle that negative influence long enough such that we can get more accurate data about what/degree of nerf.) Are we fine with that cost as long as we'll be able to maintain in the future? (Yeah, pretty much.)
I feel like this would be a good time to add DFG back into the game (especially with the Meta consisting of tanks). You could make it build out of a NLR, Codex, and a book. Give it 120 AP to make it slightly less attractive then the other higher up items and keep the 10% CDR. You could also adjust the % health nuke and damage amp as needed. Many champs will want to pick up Luden's or even Liandry with these changes and creates an item that be the opposite of Liandry's (it being picked up for plain health stacking or low MR) by punishing those that build health and high resistance. Just an idea.
They removed DFG for a reason - so it's highly unlikely that it would come back without serious modifications. Sorry.
How will Rylai's affect Annie's tibbers
It's both an AoE and a DoT effect - so it will use the 20% Slow, once per second.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=00290000,timestamp=2015-06-18T04:54:36.824+0000) > > It's both an AoE and a DoT effect - so it will use the 20% Slow, once per second. How does that work with tenacity? If I buy mercs, will it slow me for .65 seconds, then I move at a normal speed for .35 seconds, then slow, etc?
Yep. It'll produce a bit of awkwardness there in terms of looking like it's stuttering - it also heavily depends on the tick rate of the spell itself (whether it's 0.5 seconds or 1 seconds) as to when the slow pulses get applied - since they get applied with every damage tick. Some spells (Glacial Storm) will tick fast enough to refresh it. Some of the slower ones (Poison Trail) won't. At some point - standardizing the tick rate of most of these spells in a cleanup pass would be good just to ensure more predictable behavior.
new
I'm not sure I really follow the logic here, help me out? You say you don't like how builds are "constrained to a fixed set of items that greatly synergize with each other due to the high amounts of base AP on them", yet with these changes high AP builds are even more reliant on DCap now? Currently, I don't feel like I have to get DCap super early, I can get a Zhonyas/Ludens, and wait on DCap for like 5-6th item, as I still get lots of AP without relying on the passive(but I still want it eventually anyways, obviously), but I feel like with these changes I _have_ to rush DCap now. Not a fan of that.
Rushing a DCap is actually less efficient in this world - AP per AP. While the 5% increase is nice - the overall net AP you're getting from the item, compared to price is lower. While each slot offers less overall AP (Zhonya's and Ludens, for example) - they're also slightly cheaper - So if you used to primarily start Zhonya's - you would use the leftover gold to get a head start on the next item. Eventually, Death Cap will be the highest AP for the buck - but along the path up to Deathcap - you should have similar AP / Point of Gold comparison - and you'll be somewhat higher along the way if you ever incorporated Liandry's / Void Staff / Nashor's Tooth / AAA / RoA in any of your builds.
I know this is intended to be a discouragement towards rushing Deathcap, but I have concerns that in practice this will be untrue, for three core reasons: 1. Price Increase 2. Increase in total components 3. Lowering of NLR to 60 AP from 80 AP These changes make it more difficult to build Deathcap later in the game, as the highest AP item the player can sit on is the NLR, after which they must sit 2250 gold. This makes an item which grants more AP later in the game more difficult to complete the longer it goes, meaning that players will be put on a timer to finish the item. The consequences of failing to do so would create a large power trough for mages. When you consider that Void Staff is also increasing in cost, the pressure to invest in these two core items on practically every mage is daunting because the reward for completion is vastly superior to that of progression. Also, I firmly believe the Rylai's changes are far too powerful for poke type champions like Xerath and Azir. Previously, the reduced slow makes Rylai's an effective, but not overly so, item on poke mages. However, with the shift to 40% slow, the deadliness of these champions rises greatly as landing one spell quickly snowballs into another, leading to the duration factor being nonexistent.
> I know this is intended to be a discouragement towards rushing Deathcap, but I have concerns that in practice this will be untrue, for three core reasons: This really isn't a meant to be a discouragement towards rushing Deathcap. Deathcap already discourages itself from being rushed due to the fact that it's inefficient on pickup. In practice - this core pass is more about making sure that after you have Deathcap - you are more free to pick up items rather than simply building the next 2 NLR items - in order to get the maximum value out of Deathcap. > Also, I firmly believe the Rylai's changes are far too powerful for poke type champions like Xerath and Azir. Previously, the reduced slow makes Rylai's an effective, but not overly so, item on poke mages. However, with the shift to 40% slow, the deadliness of these champions rises greatly as landing one spell quickly snowballs into another, leading to the duration factor being nonexistent. I agree that it's a scary change. However, since the AoE slow is in its own category - I can tune this specific category up or down as needed.
I think this is going to be a very interesting change. Whether or not it will work out is going to take some testing, but I like the effort being put into attempting to balance the offensive items. My 2 questions for now are: Are there any plans to do the same for AD items? And if there are such plans, is there any possible ideas for a spellvamp AD item (without AP like Hextech) for AD castors like Jayce.
AD is quite a bit more complicated in its equation. AP is relatively straightforward due to the number of buckets involved - but AD is a more complex beast as it incorporates AS / Life Steal and other such matters as direct main line. As far as AD / Spellvamp goes - we've tried that item already. It's not a Jayce Item - it actually buffs AD Bruisers more than AD Casters by far.
> BY FAR Ok, joke aside. Will there be item changes in the future that might help out AD casters? They are kind of a minority in the champion pool of league and all build exactly the same 4 core items: Manamune, LW, Youmuus and Ionian Boots. I remember that you or one of your colleagues once commented that you dont like it when certain champions have a set core build of 3-4 items that does not allow variations.
While I don't remember that quote - a large part of the problem with AD Casters is they don't particularly value their basic attack - however, with this mindset, they effectively ignore every lifesteal item that would actually be quite powerful in their builds (Hydra, BoRK, BT, ER, etc.) Lifesteal is usually the most powerful sustain option available to AD Casters - and fairly effective, especially at higher echelons of play - but there's a resistance to wanting to use your attacks at all in the "AD Caster" mindset. Ultimately what it comes down to is that, as long as you undervalue LS in an AD Caster build because you want your sustain to come from AoE Burst spells - your itemization will always seem relatively stale - because you're closing yourself off to roughly half the pool of items that were also designed for them in mind. If you look up the top builds for Jayce / Zed / Kha'zix / Pantheon / Talon - for example, you'll generally see more than the items you've mentioned - but a large part of this is a willingness to use LS options that make sense (BT late game, BoRK early, Hydra for clear, etc.)
this all looks very nice man, I'm pleased. a couple of concerns though: first, and perhaps most importantly, is that Zhonya's is still too good. Its a defensive option, it shouldn't give 100 AP, it shouldn't build out of NLR. secondly, is that 4 specific champions are going to benefit from these changes massively and definitely need to be paid close attention to after 5.13 hits. Namely, Cassi, Teemo, Vlad, and Ori. Of course, Cassi and Vlad are already very strong and very annoying, but giving them A) good spellvamp in addition to their innate sustain, B) an even better Rylai's slow, when its already terribly efficient and spammable on them, and C) a higher DCap multiplier on top of their passive multipliers... honestly I'll be a little surprised if you don't have preemptive nerfs already planned for these two. Teemo of course massively benefits from Nashors, Rylais, and Liandries buffs. And Ori, being that AAing mage with decent ratios you are talking about, as well as a heavy utility laner who greatly benefits from nerfs to mid lane snowballiness... its like you are intentionally setting it up so that Orianna can dominate her 4th world championships in a row. Also, nothing on sheen/lich bane? Its not like I have any specific grievances with those two it just seems odd that neither received any changes in a core AP item pass. Did you decide that Lich Bane already is in a good spot? Lastly, what about other maps besides Rift? While I understand that your scope here is small I don't see why comparable changes shouldn't be implemented in TT or Dom, especially with things like RoA where there is a major shift in stat allocations.
> first, and perhaps most importantly, is that Zhonya's is still too good. Its a defensive option, it shouldn't give 100 AP, it shouldn't build out of NLR. If it doesn't build out of NLR - Zhonya's gets even easier to build unless you take the Guardian Angel route and stuff the most ridiculous combine cost on it. That said - While Zhonya's is a very very good item - I am not certain that hard nerfing it makes the game better currently at this point in time. My intent wasn't to shake up the AP meta-game - it was to break a very specific set of 4 self-synergizing damage items that all built from the same component. > A) good spellvamp in addition to their innate sustain, B) an even better Rylai's slow, when its already terribly efficient and spammable on them, and C) a higher DCap multiplier on top of their passive multipliers... On Spellvamp: The spellvamp is definitely stronger in a way - but it's also 33% less powerful in general (20-% > 15%) - this has some interesting effects. It is less powerful draining minions - maybe? more powerful on champions (In order for the new WoTA to beat the old WoTA vs. Champions, they need to have 50+ MR *after* all your penetration statistics - for example. This definitely does come up - but mostly against tanks.) B) Yes - this is a pretty big Rylai's change. I think I have enough levers to nerf certain edge cases - but I'll be adjusting them after I see what the net impact will be on a systematic level - as this isn't the only change to slows. C) The higher deathcap multiplier does amplify people who get intrinsic AP from their abilities - Agreed that Cassi/Vlad do benefit from this aspect. I'm not sure what the final outcome will be - but they will get stronger. > Lastly, what about other maps besides Rift? While I understand that your scope here is small I don't see why comparable changes shouldn't be implemented in TT or Dom, especially with things like RoA where there is a major shift in stat allocations. I haven't done this for TT or Dominion. The AP ecosystem is very different on that map, compared to SR and so solutions that do work on SR don't necessarily transfer well to TT or Dominion. Secondly, NLR doesn't exist on either of those maps so they've effectively already done their own version of this pass a while ago. > Also, nothing on sheen/lich bane? Its not like I have any specific grievances with those two it just seems odd that neither received any changes in a core AP item pass. Did you decide that Lich Bane already is in a good spot? As far as I could tell - nothing I did on these items actually made them more or less attractive. Mostly due to the fact that Lich Bane is pretty self-selecting. I did have some Wisp changes earlier - but those proved fairly poor when I tested them out.
While I realize that the goals of this AP item pass don't extend to TT or Dom, I think it would good for the game as a whole to keep recipes and stat allocations consistent across maps, except in cases like the lack of NLR on those maps.
Agreed. We either need to make them fairly similar or as different as humanly possible - not this weird middle ground. However - I'd like to be more confident in the direction of several of the changes (Namely RoA, Rylai's and such) before going over the other maps.
Hi Xypherous I really like these changes but I do have some concerns. Are there any plans to hit rumble with nerfs alongside these items? He's already a meta pick and benefits from every change listed. Namely a 40% slow on flame spitter from rylai's (or is it considered a DoT?) and his already perfect synergy with liandry's torment with the lower cost hourglass. I think rylai's might prove to be too strong on a few champs especially considering hourglass is a whole lot less favorable on a lot of champions because it is now also 100 ap. {{champion:115}} Ult may turn out to be an amazing chasing tool. A Q could catch out an enemy for your team {{champion:101}} Q -> W made a whole lot easier. Chaining ults a lot easier. Q could be used to catch people similar to his W now. {{champion:96}} If you hit an ult and the enemy is squishy/has no dashes that champion is now dead. I used to main AP kog in season 3 and this was my main way of killing people with only the 15% slow. {{champion:68}} If Q isn't a DOT then it + rylai's is an AOE 40% 4 second slow on a 6 second cooldown. Plus liandry's is getting buffed which is also great for rumble (and rylai's synergy). Plus wota is being buffed. this all sounds way too strong. If it isn't already coded as such, make flame spitter a DoT for all our sake! {{champion:30}} if you get hit by one Q from him with rylai's you die. I think the 40% AoE slow is too strong for catching with long range poke mages, makes specifi spells balanced around being hard to land too easy to land, and possibly breaks rumble. What do you think about these champions' interactions with this item?
On Zigg's - I agree that Q becomes an incredible chasing/pick tool for him. The question is what is Ziggs willing to give up in that slot to get that power - as he's going to be replacing either Zhonya's (Defense) or Luden's (More AoE Damage) in order to get it. I think that's a fair tradeoff to make. Xerath - This is the one that I'm not quite sure about. The tradeoff between Catch and some of the other AP items is actually the interesting bit here - unsure how suffocating it'll be. Kog'Maw - Let me know how that goes - because after the Mana changes to Kog'Maw's ult - it feels like that build requires a ton more work. Rylais will make that build great - but solving that Mana Problem might prove to be a challenge. Or it's overpowered - unsure. We'll see. Rumble - Spells that are both Area of Effects and Damage over Time effects (Striking repeatedly) use the DoT value instead of the AoE value. The AoE value only applies to instant one-shot AoE effects. Karthus - If this case is altogether too strong - I think I can tweak the duration of the slow down to 0.75. There's a ton of levers to tweak on this, I think - but the general idea is just to stop penalizing instant AoE spells so much.
the 2 that I am most question are Liandry's Torment and Rylai's Crystal Scepter Liandry's becasue of the % damage over time usualyl being under rated on a champ like Singed, teemo, Rumble or Cass when they also have slows in effect. It seems like a fairly big step up for 100 gold which benefits some of the least enjoyable champs to have to deal with. Not saying it is all bad given it does make building this item on someone like Leblanc who seems to be hurting a bit after these nerfs she recently got somewhat justified as an option but overall I am mainly worried about it being to much bang for the buck on champs that have a lot of slows already built into their kit. Perhaps instead of doubling the % current health damage it increases it from 2% to 3%. Just a thought since I have seen some items get too strong because of adding a fair amount to them for next to no cost increase *cough*BOTRK*cough* Rylai's Crystal Scepter I am manly questioning the decision to make AoE abilities slow by 40% for one second. I kinda though the reasoning behind reduced power of AoE and multi target slows was it was too strong in the first place for something like Karthus who will basically get a perma slow from it. Also not sure if everything that does damage over a long period of time is actaully marked as DoT such as swain ult which functions different form say Brand, Cass or teemo poison. Just want to make sure we don't have another IBG Ezreal with large AoE slows again.
> Liandry's Agreed. It's a very aggressive push for Liandry's. I share similar concerns over some of these characters - but the reason to do this early and to do a light pass over it is to be able to respond and retune quickly. > Also not sure if everything that does damage over a long period of time is actaully marked as DoT such as swain ult which functions different form say Brand, Cass or teemo poison. Just want to make sure we don't have another IBG Ezreal with large AoE slows again. Yeah - I think I tagged everything that was both a Spell and a DoT. We were kind of lazy about this before. I think I have the whole spell set tagged appropriately - but I could be off.
As someone who plays mostly Twisted Treeline I'm curious to see what you have in store for {{item:3090}} {{item:3003}} {{item:3116}} and {{item:3286}} . Are we likely to see {{item:1058}} in its new form added into the item list in TT?
Unsure. I'd want to be a bit more certain in the direction before I apply it in a sweeping changes. The trouble is that TT already doesn't include NLR in it - and so the ecosystem is kind of already tuned around most AP items being more similar in terms of growth patterns.
For items like Will of the Ancients, I have to ask. Does it have any special interaction with DoT, or will Space Aids be able to heal me fully with a single wave?
DoT's were already full power under the effects of Spell Vamp, I believe - this is no different.
I do feel like Archangel's Staff is getting nerfed and Deathcap should be 140AP if the gold cost is going up Personally I feel deathcap and archangels giving a butt ton of AP is fine and possibly increase Archangel's AP conversion passive to like 3.5% or 4% from 3% One thing I do think is that Hourglass is getting buffed on an already overpowered item ; Hourglass i believe is such a powerful item you can lower the ap to 100 increase deathcaps to 140- have deathcap passive and ap higher with 3500g, and keep hourglass at 3300g-- deathcap is only one stat so it can give a lot of that stat and be balanced but since hourglass' active is so powerful it can lose AP and still be super powerful; the stasis active is A LOT more powerful than your (Riot's) balancing team gives it credit for and deathcap and hourglass were originally created so you have an uber AP item with deathcap and the defense portions in stats and active in hourglass (Zhonya's Ring was a little overpowered, which is now Witchlet's Cap or whatever it is called on other maps)
A 140 AP Deathcap would be de-facto the first rush item ever. Not only would it be gold efficient standalone at 3500 G - Pretty much no item would be able to compete with the damage spike you'd get on completion. A price increase of 200 barely justifies the 5% AP boost it gets - Throwing 20 AP on it (Effectively 27 due to passive) - kind of creates a kind of flat, yet terribly powerful first item. > Hourglass Yes - Hourglass is really really powerful. My intent wasn't really to knock items out of contention - I wanted to break up a specific 4-item set combination that I was seeing in AP builds that focused around getting the largest AP items and multiplying them all out. This is mostly to create a wider band of AP items that can fit in that bucket.
new
I feel like every item is way too expensive. Can we reduce the price of ap items overall? The amount of power every item gives have been lowered... so it won't have much of a impact even if you buy those item. Yet it is still expensive. It pushes apc's into late game orientated champ, and late game is for adc, apc now cannot do the same job as adc, meaning apc won't have any strong point in game simply because they don't have the carry damage. I feel like your trying to make apc more of cc machine and hp shredder. I don't really like that imo. They(champs like ahri with low base and low ap ratio) will suffer the most from these changes. As Ahri relied on her mid game for her horrible late game. If this update is to remove ahri from meta, well I am not for it. Buff ahris late game if these changes will go through. This will remove mid game orientated apc out from viability and apc with late game orientated will be even stronger. Does riot hate ahri that much? Not even giving her pool party skin. I guess challenger ahri skin was for the beginning of the season and never again in the future. Ahri now is soo boring to play and trashy. With this change she will be even weaker. At least give her her range back on her w and r. If these changes go through I would need those range reverted.
We actually had a couple of the pro players play this set of changes for a day or two. Their conclusion was that the reduced price of NLR gives assassin champions like Ahri the consistency they needed. Their main point on Ahri was that her unreliability in hitting the really big AP items (due to NLR's price point) held her back a fair bit - and that the new price point of NLR was overall, probably a net positive for her. That said - that was only a day or two of tests, so I can't predict what will happen exactly - but they seemed neutral to positive for her on it.
Xypherous, I'm worried about how is this going to effect overall damage at various points in the game (say at half build and at full build) and how much more is our mana costs per damage on mana champs going to be. Mana seems weaker this season so this feels like this is going to hurt mages more in that first you are getting less AP from your big items and second, the damage you do is going to cost more relatively as mana costs are staying the same and damage is going down (it seems). Example, let's say you rush the 3 main NLR items: dcap, zhonya's, and luden's. Before you'd get 468 AP and now you'd get 405. A full build with 5 NLR items gets you 675 AP, but no voidstaff. Compare that two the present 3+rylai's plus void staff and you'd get 689 AP, plus that big chunk of MR ignoring from the void staff. I think mages are getting screwed on this, particularly come late game.
Quick questino, how are you getting 405 from the DCap/Zhonya's/Luden's Combo? (100 + 100 + 120) * 1.35 = 432. This combination is also 200 gold cheaper total - which is roughly 10 AP~ or 13.5 after deathcap. Which puts it at 450 vs. 468. It's still an overall nerf (mainly because - yes, this is a Luden's nerf.) - but the more AP you have from other sources, like runes and masteries - the smaller the gap becomes overall. The gap shrinks or reverses if your build included any of the following items: Nashor's Tooth, Liandry's Torment, Rod of Ages or AAAA.
I counted D-cap as a 100 AP item, I guess I assumed it was getting nerfed as well. BTW, as an Ahri main I don't get any of those items usually. I'd love to get Nashor's on her but I think she needs the mobility+mana of LB more if I want to buff auto attacks. I don't get Liandry's on her either as you rarely have room in your build for it. Ahri needs: boots, dcap, ludens, voidstaff, and probably a mana/cdr item (maybe both if you suck at mana management). There's just no room in her build for other stuff. It's kind of like the ADCs where they all get the same 6 items because they need those 6. Ahri is kind of the same way.
That seems to be a common point of confusion. Let me make the original post clearer - as if you're confused, there's probably a lot of other people confused too. Thanks for ze input. :D
new
I think the Hourglass change is fundamentally good. It's been pretty op for a long time now. The Seraph changes scare me. It gives a *ton* of AP now, not to mention when you have the new mana-buffed RoA and the %AP buffed Deathcap. Rylai's seems scary too since suddenly people with easy to land AoE spells can use a 40% slow on them to hit another spell. In my mind Morg W, Velkoz W/R are all not DoT spells per se (I'm thinking poisons, Malz E, Swain Q E) but they're going to be insane if they get a 40% slow. So I hope my terminology is off and you are including this kind of spells in the DoT category. Otherwise Morg QW (W lands first) makes a properly aimed Q almost un dodgable, Velkoz will easily land the second proc of W and probably and E, and wipe whole teams with a 40% slowing R. Also get ready to nerf champions who already build WotA sometimes, because they're going to be over the top now.
You are correct - I had to go back and tag every AoE spell that also did damage over time to count as both an AoE spell and a DoT spell. I'll try to clarify the tooltip a bit - Multi-Hit / Damage Over Time spells.
new
Seraph will be a monster AP item. With lvl 18 you will already get nearly 140 AP, 1k mana, 50% mana reg and the active from it. Combine that with ROA or DC alone and it will be crazy.
RoA + AAA? That's pretty brave I think. More of RoA's power is pushed into stacking - and AAA is tear. With the amount of costs you're taking on - it might actually just be worth the risk.
Doesn't raising Void Staff's cost and raising the AP both muddy its identity as a counter pick item for MR stacking while simultaneously making it harder to purchase reactivelly? Why not lower its cost (so you can react to MR tanks) while lowering its AP (so you're suitably punished for buying it in the wrong situations?
Sort of. The main issue with Void Staff is that 35% Total Pen is effectively a % damage amp. They don't really need MR for it to be one of the best damage amplification items you can buy. If Void Staff was % Bonus Penetration instead - I'd totally agree with you on that point - except every single time I test Void Staff as dedicated % Bonus MR destroyer - No one bought MR and simply stacked Health. There's something deeper there that a light pass like this won't actually do.
So, let's talk about pen. #Void Staff {{item:3135}} > [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=002f0000,timestamp=2015-06-18T06:18:58.962+0000) > > If Void Staff was % Bonus Penetration instead - I'd totally agree with you on that point - except every single time I test Void Staff as dedicated % Bonus MR destroyer - No one bought MR and simply stacked Health. There's something deeper there that a light pass like this won't actually do. The problem with % *Bonus* MR shred, is that in order to be meaningful it needs to shred a *lot* of MR. Since void is a cheap item, this means tanks and bruisers think like this: "it isn't work it to invest in MR, since 5 min later they'll have a void and my MR will be null and void" (sorrynotsorry). Plus, void might still have been core on mages anyway. When a % bonus resist item is core on a damage dealers, *of course* tanks and bruisers are going to choose to stack HP. So either we can't do the bonus shred, or void can't be a cheap item. Since the "this isn't possible" route isn't very interesting, let's talk about the second half of that sentence - and try to figure out how to make Void an expensive/awkward item that isn't a core purchase. - **Void can't be a high AP item.** If it is, then it's useful purely for the AP, and it's still core. - Since DFG's removal, we've been missing good small-cdr items. - People, and you, have expressed concerns about Luden's role -- these patch changes are to try to give it a more distinct identity from DC. So, what if we put some cdr on Luden's and gave Void its MS, along with something like 50-60% Bonus MR pen, 30-50 AP, and/or a cool unique, and made it cost ~3k? The objective here being that void is both not worth it to build unless the enemy is stacking MR, and *hard* to build if you're not already planning for it -> give it an awkward build path, like Wand + Wisp + 1.4k, or Wand + Tome + Tome + 1.2k. Alternatively, another option is to keep it cheap but awkward. Something like Wisp + 1.5k = 40 AP + 10% MS + 50% Bonus MR Pen. The other reason void is a core purchase is that Abyssal and Liandries don't really cut it as far as multiplicative scaling goes. They just don't give enough AP (and 0 cdr) to be worth it on high damage mages, who might be forced to hit tanks and bruisers (as opposed to assassins, who always go for squishies). Void staff might be less core if there were an alternative that helped in a different scenario.... so let's talk about a different item: #Liandry's Torment / Haunting Guise Guise is in a weird place. It gives flat mpen but doesn't have the burn effect, so the champs that synnergize well with it aren't necessarily the same ones that synnergize well with Liandry's. It leaves me feeling weird when I want to get a Liandry's so I can shred tanks, and it feels like I'm just sitting on Guise until I can get Liandries. Or where I buy a guise to snowball on my assassin, and don't really feel like upgrading it. > [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=002d0000,timestamp=2015-06-18T06:22:44.342+0000) > > Liandry's Torment is specifically designed to punish Health Stacking in the absence of a lot of MR. Hence the odd combination of Flat Penetration + Health Shred. Basically, if you're up against someone who rushed Cinderhulk into Righteous Glory for example - and still has base MR - that's the target Liandry's is designed to hose. That's a niche that's important to keep around. At the same time, with Abyssal being reworked into an AP bruiser item, it feels like AP Assassins, who arguably aren't in the best shape right now, in the Tank Meta, are losing out on itemization. So, what if we added a new item to take the void left by the reworks of the staff and scepter, and changed around some build paths? {{item:1052}} + {{item:1052}} +Combine Cost = {{item:3136}}. 40 AP, UNIQUE +15 mpen. It's an AP brut, minus the cdr. {{item:3136}} + {{item:1028}} + Combine = {{item:3151}} Pretty much like live. {{item:3136}} + {{item:1026}} + Combine = 80AP, +30 mpen. An AP Youmuu. It could even have an active that gives you a mini Ryze passive for a couple seconds, if that could be healthy. So at the end, we have Void if they're stacking MR, Liandry's if they're stacking HP, and the new Item if they're squishy.
I've generally noted that the mere *existence* of a high % bonus penetration item is what causes people to avoid MR - due to the fact that, it is entirely pointless to spend 4 or 5k gold negating the effects of the opponent if you leave yourself such a massive weakness in a quick turnaround case. It's not a matter of if the item is good or balanced or not - it's just that - the presence of such a strong negator means that the value of MR either has to be extremely cheap (which has other terrible side effects - such as negating magic as a damage source for non pen using classes.) (You may also want to think about the number of AP "bruiser/potential bruisers" in the game with your Void Staff implementation - who rely primarily on base magic damage - See also: Elise, LIssandra, Evelynn). > At the same time, with Abyssal being reworked into an AP bruiser item, it feels like AP Assassins, who arguably aren't in the best shape right now, in the Tank Meta, are losing out on itemization. Firstly, it kind of assumes they need help to begin with. Secondly, super specific narrow items tend to hut the champions they are designed for more than helping them. The more focused items become towards synergizing towards a specific class - the more that classes inherent strengths get weakened by the fact that the item exists. An excellent case study of this is hybrid items. Once you've made a hybrid item that is super focused on empowering hybrid classes - what you've done is created a single item spike for that class. However, once you've created that single item spike - they are completely domineering - thus, you lower their ratios until that single item spike is balanced. The end result of this is that every other item is comparatively poorer on them. In this case - by creating a focused MPen Item that appeals specifically to AP Assassins and no one else - the most likely result is that the base damage of all AP Assassins would go down - and they would have a seriously hard time getting out of lane - because the assumption is that, once they do get out of lane - they will automatically do true damage to squishies. However, if AP Assassin base damages are low - almost every form of CDR/Mana item early on them is really really bad as they'll be forced to pick up as much AP as possible to compensate for the loss of bases. (See Also: Vlad is nerfed because Spell Vamp exists and Spell Vamp is preety much only good for him.) Note that this problem is mostly created by creating narrow items that serve to optimize something, like DPS. Things that fill gaps in a character's kit doesn't usually struggle with this particular burden (Ex: Zhonya's on Morgana actually allows her to buy other AP Items as it compensates for her kit pattern) - but this has other issues like... not being able to control a set of strengths and weaknesses on a champion. It's a fascinating problem space usually when combined with balance concerns.
I wish you guys would just give Liandry's Torment a proper niche. It has two half-assed passives where neither really makes a player want to pick it up. One of them gives the player strong squishy-bursting power, while the other adds more poking and kiting power. I think it's really cool that you guys are giving us more breathing room with these items. I won't feel something like Zhonya's is just a must-have item, but rather something to build against AD-heavy teams or certain champs like Zed or Talon. Now I have the option to take Rylai's Crystal Scepter in lieu of Luden's Echo if I want extra kiting power against champs like Volibear or Shen. But there are no situations where I say "Man, I really need to build Liandry's Torment this game". If the whole enemy team is tanky, the flat penetration is useless and I don't want to build the item. If the whole enemy team is squishy, the whittling power of the %HP over time is useless and I don't want to build the item. If the enemy team is properly mixed, then I've got tons of better items to build and I don't want to build the item.
Liandry's Torment is specifically designed to punish Health Stacking in the absence of a lot of MR. Hence the odd combination of Flat Penetration + Health Shred. Basically, if you're up against someone who rushed Cinderhulk into Righteous Glory for example - and still has base MR - that's the target Liandry's is designed to hose. Yeah - I know it's a weird combination of statistics. Going hard on MR is supposed to negate Liandry's entirely - which is then occupied by Void Staff. It's the fact that there's a base level of magic resistance in the game that Liandry's has the Flat Magic Penetration. Theoretically, Liandry's passive should probably read something closer to: You ignore 100% of a target's base magic resistance - except the fact that that passive would be insane.
Xypherous a question about supports. Some AP supports if fed might get an AP item or two. Since the big AP items are getting nerfed, this is going to be nerfing them, and they tend not to have the money that an AP mid can afford. I guess the same goes for the few junglers that can go AP: aren't they really getting screwed with the loss of magus and now the loss of raw AP from the core AP items? Runeglaive is 40 AP lost. Now something like ludens (I'd consider that on Eve) is losing another 20. Elise gets zhonya's so there's another 20 AP lost for her.
Wait.. how are you getting 60 AP lost on Runeglaive + New Deathcap? Deathcap is still at 120 AP - hence: (120 + 40) * 1.35 = 216. vs. (120 + 80) * 1.3 = 260. It should be 216 vs. 260 - in terms of net AP and Runeglaive has a quasi Lich Bane built right into it which should make up the difference pretty easily - unless your Fiddlesticks and have absolutely zero interest in autoattacking whatsoever. Even AP Amumu cares about autoattacking because 25 MR shred is INSANE.
Hi, do multi-target spells like Karthus ult and Vlad E count as single-target or AoE spell? (for Rylai's and WOTA)
Karthus Ult and Vlad 'E' are both AoE spells I believe.
Heyo, i have some serious concerns about the new rylais slow > Passive Instant AoE: 15% Slow for 1.5 seconds --> 40% Slow for 1 second There are a few champions that can keep up a strong permaslow with this change: {{champion:84}} Since the E got changed to be spammable akali can keep up the 40% slow until she runs out of energy (not that viable tho) {{champion:12}} passive with a cdr build (not viable again; need to chain the spells akward, also ap ali sucks) {{champion:32}} cry me an icecold river {{champion:34}} no need for the item in first place, still has the hard slow though {{champion:1}} tibbers aura is an aeo and has the highest over all ap scaleing ingame, which u can apply pretty easy with the new rylai {{champion:268}} **AZIR!!!** his W autos are counted as aoe spells instead of autos, which means, that every auto will apply a 40% slow! {{champion:69}} i guess this one is still intended {{champion:42}} sounds dumb in first place, but every spell is aoe, can be chained efficiently and there are some nerds out there who will play him ap {{champion:36}} you dont go where mundo doesnt please??? {{champion:245}} q field reapplies the slow on every proc and is aoe, so is the ult (is not chainable though) {{champion:28}} q is aeo and obviosly chainable {{champion:43}} not chainable, but the q ult is extremely hard to escape with rylais rush {{champion:30}} every spell aeo + 2 spams {{champion:55}} not chainable, but the ult channel potental is gross {{champion:10}} e autos is the same as azir {{champion:96}} **THIS DUDE** kog maw can chain his ult perfectly with 40% cdr and mana sustain, its aoe, long range and deals hard dmg if u get some ap! lvl 16 is basically, if one ult hits you, its pretty much over. this gives him enormous zoneing {{champion:127}} 40% q spam {{champion:21}} some people play ap mf.... (its not that strong with rylai, as you will max w and this already has a super strong slow) {{champion:25}} puddle and ult (not chainable though), sets up some easy q {{champion:61}} 40% cdr + q spam lets her get clso to chaining, especially with other abilities added {{champion:33}} not chainable, but the ult is still hard {{champion:68}} **THIS DUDE²** well, easy math {{champion:13}} the grand master of chaining has aoe on every ability with ult (also his ap ratios are not to bad after the rework) {{champion:72}} dunno if hybrid skaner works, but the q spam with rylai should feel like the old days, when the q still slow you to death, literally {{champion:50}} **THIS DUDE³** combine this with the roa, seraph and wota changes and he is a _beast_ {{champion:161}} hard to chain, but possible. if u rush it in lane you can set up an undodgeable e with the w as long, as the enemy has no t2 boots yet {{champion:8}} **ANOTHER DUDE** i can imagine a lot of e max with this, lyandrys and wota {{champion:115}} **SO MANY DUDES** easy math again, every spell aoe + 40% cdr spam. kinda like kog maw {{champion:143}} same as vel koz, not chainable though {{champion:154}} little bit like rammus (no chains here either) So this is a pretty hughe list, but all the "**DUDES**" are the things im scared about the most, as they can chain heir abilities without much effort and keep up a permaslow of 40% I dont know if this is totally intended, but i feel like some of these champs are getting in a too good pot, especially thoses who are already frequently played. If there is anything, i did not see, please let me know. Cya, Sanjay {{summoner:31}}
A lot of the spells listed are both AoE and DoT spells. A good rule of thumb is that - if it's using the spinup counter - it's probably counted as a DoT spell. That said - yeah, Azir is scary.
Please don't nerf the health on Rod of Ages. If the established goal of these changes is to increase viability of less bursty mages, this change seems to do just the opposite. If a mage can not burst down a target, they will need to survive long enough to deal significant damage. The health on Rylais was nerfed a while back and it dropped out of favor for a lot of champs in light of better defense options. I'd rather see new spellvamp item options than removing spellvamp from one of two available options; the other one having an AD/lifesteal component that is a waste on some champs that would otherwise love spellvamp. A more defensive option (say with MR) would definitely boost mages that aren't bursty. The messaging on spellvamp is also really unclear for players. Many players believe spellvamp = AP/magic damage, which isn't the case. If there were a strictly AD & spellvamp option, it would be a great pickup for AD casters like Zed or Talon. The word 'spell' implies magic damage, as such a more diverse pool of spellvamp items that address the needs of magic damage dealers, and removal of healing for AD casters, would increase perceived value of spellvamp kits & champs. As to not leave AD casters out in the cold, there would need to be a shift in lifesteal to heal on physical damage abilities. Or I suppose you could go the opposite way and rename it to 'abilityvamp' or 'skillvamp' to better reflect its actual effect. In any case I'm happy that you're at least recognizing that spellvamp isn't in a good spot and attempting to fix it. Overall I'm not sure the changes really address the goal, I suppose time will tell. I look forward to the Rylais changes though, that is definitely a step in the right direction and will likely become core on champs again.
> If a mage can not burst down a target, they will need to survive long enough to deal significant damage. Not convinced on that - but we were scanning down the available RoA users and almost every single instance of them - we were concerned about how durable they were getting. > If there were a strictly AD & spellvamp option, it would be a great pickup for AD casters like Zed or Talon. We've tried this item before. It's terrible on Zed and Talon compared to lifesteal. The crux of the issue is that - the vast majority of spells they have is AoE, bursty - with longer cooldowns. Who the item actually buffs is AD bruisers like Darius - or quasi AD tanks like Lee Sin - who have short cooldown, the ability to build resistances and who have a sustained damage pattern.
new
What is your opinion on Seeker's armguard? I kinda of dislike the fact that the performance of this item is based on how many stacks you have on it, like what happens if the player is a bad last hitter/bad ping? I prefer if this item is stream lined to be like other items where you just pay for a one off stat/effect, similarly to how Old BT and S2 Warmogs was removed Is this possible in this AP Pass update? So for example: Seeker's armguard: 30 armor --> 45 armor and 25 AP --> 40 AP Stacking passive removed.
That item would have to cost almost 50% more than the current item - as you are getting the statistics up front. However, at that price point - it doesn't do anything for the niche it was designed to function in - giving AP mages some degree of resilience from AD.
Hey Xyph, I've noticed a few people have commented on Runeglaive already, but there is one thing I wanted to address very specifically. When you upgrade to Runeglaive, you lose the 100% Base AD proc and it's replaced with a 75% Base Auto + 30% AP. For most junglers this ends up not being an upgrade in damage, and in some cases it results in almost no net gain unless you are running a full set of AP Runes (+26 AP with Glyphs/Quints), and even that is only about 5 extra damage. If you run with only +15 AP, which is more common among bruisers like Diana and Elise, you actually lose damage by upgrading to Runeglaive. I'm not trying to discount the added bonus of the AoE effect (which I do hope gets a particle of some kind), or the mana return, but is that really enough to justify what is essentially a side-grade in single target damage? Even Warrior gets more AD (15, I think?) than just a Brutalizer. And while the AoE effect is neat, I'm not really sure anyone even wants it. Most AP junglers don't have issues clearing camps if they have the mana to use, which this item ensures. I'm not trying to nitpick the item, but it does feel less impactful when you first pick it up than I would expect. (As opposed to when I get Warrior/Cinderhulk, I do feel much stronger.)
Hm... that's an interesting point. I'm not working on Runeglaive directly but I'll bring that up. The only thing I can think of is the fact that most units generally have less MR than Armor (some jungle monsters have negative MR, for example) - and that might be where the difference is coming from.
Are their thoughts about increasing the CDR of Will of the Ancients to 20% so it can fit the same spot like OmNomNomicon or Athene's Unholy Grail for manaless champions? Because pretty much all users of Will of the Ancients do not use mana currently. Or, how to give manaless AP champions more options to reach 40% CDR?
I don't think that's necessary. You have an incredible lane and build advantage from being manaless. The tradeoff is that you're not going to use certain items well because you don't synergize and I think that's pretty important overall.
new
Oh man, as a Vel'Koz main, I look forward to Rylai. Ult currently slows by 20%, but with Rylai it'll slow by 40% because I recall that his ult isn't defined as a dot. Can a Rioter confirm?
Rule of thumb: If it's using the spinup display - it's probably a DoT as well.
new
Will the rylai slow proc on Teemo's E or is that still unchanged? Also, rip full AP Teemo now that the Luden + Lich Bane powerspike is reduced. I usually didn't go Raba until like 4th or 5th item, since Luden, Lich and Zhonya are so core for him :(
Teemo's 'E' is a magical on-hit effect - and thus doesn't synergize with any spell triggers, unfortunately.
Changing spell vamp is good and all, but what about a new life steal passive that actually heals you from the raw damages you deal too?
That's my initial thought for Gunblade - but that's probably a pass left for another day.
I'm slightly concerned about the Rabadon's Deathcap changes. Already a keystone in the meta, purchased on literally ALL AP scaling champions at some point in the game, aren't the changes going to further increase its dominance with the reductions to other powerful AP items? Item diversity is a key goal of League; each item having its own niche. Will solidifying Rabadon's Deathcap even further as a must-buy item help achieve this goal? I'd like some thoughts on this. Personally, I want to see true item diversity, where Deathcap is more of the "I need raw damage and I need it now, and I really don't care about utility," item, rather than an item that is all-important on every champion as it is now. >it heavily narrows the types of mage patterns to those that can best use this particular offensive combination I see this issue coming with the new Rabadon's Deathcap. Mages that want utility or even NEED utility are instead forced into Deathcap, because of the lack of other extreme AP options. I'd favor hitting the AP to 100, making it more of a later-game option instead of a second-item option. > As Deathcap is the keystone I want a lot of AP item - we pushed the power here. Isn't it already the keystone I want a lot of AP item? I feel like making it THE ONLY 120 AP item is, fundamentally, bringing back the old Bloodthirster issue, where EVERY ADC, no matter it be Tristana or Caitlyn, Graves or Lucian, was forced to get it because it had so much damage that it crowded out other options. Add that to the fact that Deathcap also scales the more items you have, and I'm concerned that it will be completely dominant and overshadow other choices as a second or even first item. I'd like thoughts on this, including the rationale behind leaving Deathcap at 120 AP. I believe you guys have a reason (most of your changes, if not all, are good long-term decisions hitting good spots), but I'm not quite sure what that reason is. Let's discuss Deathcap, guys!
> Hailrake Glacial Cascade. Respawn in Town. > Isn't it already the keystone I want a lot of AP item? I feel like making it THE ONLY 120 AP item is, fundamentally, bringing back the old Bloodthirster issue, where EVERY ADC, no matter it be Tristana or Caitlyn, Graves or Lucian, was forced to get it because it had so much damage that it crowded out other options. Bloodthirster had a couple of major problems with it - none of which was its 100 AD identity. 1. It stacked up in lane. 2. It had primarily lane centric statistics. 3. It was noticeably better on the first person who bought it - making it a rush or bust kind of deal. 4. It was efficient upon purchase. Deathcap doesn't share any of these concerns. An early rushed deathcap doesn't really give you a whole ton of advantages. A rushed deathcap barely gives you more AP than simply buying AP component items - therefore, the advantage of a rushed deathcap is that your next item will be stronger... but you could've just finished any other item first and had more impact early. Secondly - Deathcap is going to be core in every mage who wants to deal damage. That's the identity of the item and marks a clear distinction and investment from utility type builds. Lastly - it's actually pretty easy to tune when Deathcap becomes efficient in your build by lowering the AP or raising the GP cost. However, for this AP item pass - one of my goals from the outset was to keep the TOTAL amount of AP that the damage builds vs. Gold equal. I'm not interested in this light pass to change the major identity of the items or solve major issues - simply to break up a some specific item set from overshadowing every other possible build. For the future - I do agree with you that the amount of power in Deathcap is probably too high, multiplier-wise. However, to accomplish that goal - we should probably rescale the value of AP - and thus it'd be a slightly larger change that is probably best done at some other time.
> Liandry's Torment Recipe Change: Haunting Guise + Blasting Wand Total Cost: 2900 G --> 3000 G Ability Power: 50 Base AP --> 80 Base AP >Liandry's Torment is designed to be able to fit as a High Health / Low Resistance shredder (hence the combination of health damage + flat penetration). However, the lower AP on the item frequently meant your kit didn't actually work. Aggressively pushing the power of this build to be able to compete with the more immediate damage type builds - like proc builds. Please no. This item has a great niche but a very poor implementation of that niche. You're saying you want this item to be strong against high health targets without a lot of resistances. Most APs that have a hard time dealing with these kinds of champions are long CD burst champions. 1. The burn mechanic is stronger for people who can reapply it as the effect wears off. This is pretty much the complete opposite of long CD burst. 2. You don't need to provide *any* magic pen if you want this to be an effective item against low MR targets. See 3. 3. TRADE OFFS. This change screams lack of trade offs. You have an item with fairly strong AP and flat mpen which on their own are strong against low health, low MR targets. Right now the only trade off is the opportunity cost of not having a stronger item. Liandry's Torment should be redesigned. If you want it to actually fill its niche then you should change the passive to something like the following: > Your abilities burn the target for (X + Y*target bonus health)% extra damage over Z seconds. Reapplying the burn adds to the existing burn. There's a very clear trade off here. Your kit still scales well, but you focus your kill potential on high health targets.
If you have a single item pivot hard counter - what you essentially do is force two players into a state where they can't really interact with anything besides each other. While you do get clear tradeoffs - the gameplay involved reduces pretty far down to -> I can only threaten the enemy Mordekaiser. Therefore, I don't really get to do anything interesting besides the narrow focus I've locked myself into. While this is great in a strategic game where you can customize a large number of units for specific functions - I don't think there's quite enough units or there's few enough functions that this kind of focus would actually result in more interesting gameplay overall - as you get a bunch of narrow 'hosers' that don't really interact with with any other piece. There is an additional consideration that once you make a specific narrow hard counter to a particular style - the most likely outcome is that players simply opt out of playing that style - because it's so easy to get countered.
I feel like the same can be said of any stat though (or in some cases, it should). For example, Last Whisper should be a decision to counter large amounts of armor while being less efficient against lower amounts of armor. Building a heavy MR item is a clear response to an AP heavy team. How do you feel about thornmail? To me, thornmail is a very well designed item. It's good at one thing, but it's not overbearing; If your team is AA focused it provides a clear weakness. In the same way, if you stack nothing but healthy tanks then you'll have a clear weakness. What I'm seeing instead is that if you want to be strong against one or two people on a team that have a lot of health you build Liandry's and are still extremely effective against squishy champions. I'm not saying the numbers on the passive I suggested should make you only effective against health, but there should be some tradeoff to take into consideration. The point isn't to make it a hard counter in the sense of "I get this item and I win against health" , but at the same time it shouldn't be a no-brainer, general use item. A style being easily countered doesn't mean players will opt out of it. I see heavy AP all the times that know the other team will stack MR, but then have a big AD threat. You're saying, "Hey, you can counter me, but it means you'll have a really hard time against my ADC." That's interesting and fun gameplay.
In a world where your items were free - I think that your approach to items has definite merit. Or perhaps, if the decisions were made in a context where swapping and trading between options had relatively little cost. However, the inherent tradeoff that already exists in the game is the opportunity cost of the item over a similar item. For example, choosing to be good vs. tanks -or- good vs. squishies in this case isn't the option of buying Liandry's. It's the option of buying Liandrys **over** Lich Bane or something with a higher spike potential. The tradeoff is inherent in the Gold price of the item. In a game where items were free to swap in and out (like, an ARPG for instance, where the decision is between do I put this item in this slot vs. another item) - I think your rationale makes perfect sense. However, in a game where you are already making tradeoff decisions due to spending Gold that could've gone towards another item - the tradeoff can be created by the existence of other items (In this case, Deathcap / Luden's / Lichbane would all be way better squishy murderer in most cases.) All that said, however - I admit I am pushing the power of Liandry's a lot. Perhaps too far, as you're pointing out.
Thanks for holding a conversation and not just making it a one off :) Super tired so this might be slightly incoherent... Aside from the inclusion of gold I don't see a difference between the ARPG scenario and the LoL scenario. In both scenarios you're provided with the option of choosing one item over another to fit your situation with a limited number of options to take. The only differences is that in LoL you need to buy it. Assuming you have enough gold to buy either option it's the same choice. Which one is better? That's the heart of what I'm saying. When I look at Liandry's it should really mean something to choose it over Luden's. As is, Liandry's burn feels very ineffective compared to other options, but the flat mpen and health are amazing early game stats for reasons totally unrelated to the item's niche. There are circumstances where Luden's feels like a better tank killing item if you're spammy enough. It doesn't at all feel like an item that most mages would pick up even if they did want to do better against a tank. Raw AP or other effects feel like they get the job done better. That being said, a buffed Liandry's doesn't feel good for anyone involved. As the buyer I feel like regardless of which option I choose I'll still be effective against anyone. It's not a fun decision because in the end the amount it matters isn't enough to make it interesting. As an opposing tank I feel cheated because you made a choice to more effectively counter me, yet you sacrifice little for it. As an opposing squishy I feel cheated because you made a choice to target someone else, but you're still very strong against me as well. On part of the Liandry's section of the post that I really agree about is that it feels like your kit is ineffective. Your kit should feel good to use, not the item (a sentiment I strongly feel towards virtually all support itemization). To make up for your kit feeling worse you're straight buffing AP, but that's making it more effective in the wrong direction. It's not the low AP that makes your kit feel ineffective; it's that the passive has little to do with you kit that makes your kit feel ineffective. I'm not trying to push my own mechanic, but it's the kind of mechanic that keeps your kit feeling fun. It doesn't depend on how often you can apply the effect or "coincidental" things like that. It's *your* damage that's causing the burn effect. It's just that its effectiveness is skewed to another class of targets. On a related note, what do you feel is the purpose of armor pen and magic pen? Do you feel it's a general damage amplifier or that it's there to counter defensive stats? Both? Neither? What do you consider the purpose of flat vs percent and reduction vs pen is?
The main difference between LoL and an ARPG is that you can **swap back** in an ARPG - but you cannot in LoL - therefore, the items need a relatively larger amount of difference and specialization to stand out from one another but it is completely doable since there is zero cost to swapping them back and forth. In LoL - the swap cost is huge (again, gold driven) - and frequently you are making some aspect of the decision before you fully know what your opponent is actually threatening. You cannot change course as easily - nor can you reverse your previous decisions without cost - therefore, unless the item provides a baseline level of security - the item basically has to make you auto-win if you guess right - because if you guess wrong, you lose. > It's not the low AP that makes your kit feel ineffective; it's that the passive has little to do with you kit that makes your kit feel ineffective. If his basically reduces down to 'I don't like HP burns and I want more burst damage on tank targets' - you are perfectly valid in disliking the fact that Liandry's is a slow burn that synergizes based on how much of a poke / kite pattern you are rather than how much of a burst/rapid caster you are. That said, that's not a comment on trade-offs - that's a comment on the play pattern feeling generally unsatisfying on most burst mages. > that's making it more effective in the wrong direction. The crux of the issue that I'm trying to point out is that - many utility mages require a high amount of AP for their utility spells to function well (most notably, shield effects). There's another side to this where many poke/kite mages are also catcher syle mages - and thus - a large part of their contribution is the ability to threaten squishies out of nowhere. With Torment being a relatively inefficient source of AP - all buying Liandry's meant was - you can't do the things your mage is expected to do - even if you've correctly identified there are high value targets on the other side to burn. There are a ton of options that exist that can further enhance what your mage is supposed to do - so Torment sandbagging you in this aspect meant that it's not an option when you want to choose to react to your opponent. Torment does not need a built-in penalty in order for there to be a huge contrast to another potential item buy. > On a related note, what do you feel is the purpose of armor pen and magic pen? Do you feel it's a general damage amplifier or that it's there to counter defensive stats? Both? Neither? What do you consider the purpose of flat vs percent and reduction vs pen is? Flat Penetration, generally speaking, acts as a target focus. It doesn't currently but that's due to it being entirely item driven rather than kit driven. The more you rely on Flat Penetration - the smaller your available pool of targets gets. % Penetration, on the other hand, broadens your range of targets and makes you more agnostic to who you're actually fighting. We're using both of these statistics pretty poorly at the moment, to be perfectly honest - but it'll require a deeper pass to get this one right.
>The main difference between LoL and an ARPG is that you can swap back in an ARPG - but you cannot in LoL - therefore, the items need a relatively larger amount of difference and specialization to stand out from one another but it is completely doable since there is zero cost to swapping them back and forth. >In LoL - the swap cost is huge (again, gold driven) - and frequently you are making some aspect of the decision before you fully know what your opponent is actually threatening. You cannot change course as easily - nor can you reverse your previous decisions without cost - therefore, unless the item provides a baseline level of security - the item basically has to make you auto-win if you guess right - because if you guess wrong, you lose. I hadn't made my argument with swapping in mind (in both cases I assumed you choice was permanent). You're right that it would feel punishing to choose wrong, but I really think it should. It shouldn't decide the outcome of the game in either direction, but it should definitely be more of a factor. That's a great kind of decision to have in your games. If the enemy team has a moderately healthy top laner and 3 or 4 squishies then you really deserve to have a hard time if you build a health buster item. It won't make you lose, but you'll have a harder time. At the same time, if the other team has a Mundo top, Sej jungle, and Cho mid (for argument's sake) then you deserve to be rewarded for making the right choice. Again, it's not an auto win, but it's enough to reward your adaptability. All of these cases are avoidable from an opponent's perspective with forethought. You shouldn't be picking a bunch of high health champions that are all countered by the same item in the same way that you shouldn't pick all magic damage. Obviously there's an extreme where the item means you can't play high health champions at all, but that seems more like a tweakable balance issue assuming the item itself is healthy. Right now I don't think the item is healthy. >If his basically reduces down to 'I don't like HP burns and I want more burst damage on tank targets' - you are perfectly valid in disliking the fact that Liandry's is a slow burn that synergizes based on how much of a poke / kite pattern you are rather than how much of a burst/rapid caster you are. >That said, that's not a comment on trade-offs - that's a comment on the play pattern feeling generally unsatisfying on most burst mages. That's not what I intended to say. I don't care if it's a burn or burst, nor should my personal playstyle preference matter. The current effect itself is affected by the enemy's current HP, CC applied to them, and the number of times you can apply it. A Veigar will deal the same amount of damage from Liandry's with 0 AP and 1K AP. All that matters is that the effect was applied. A pure tank Shyvana would deal more damage than a Veigar with any amount of AP through Liandry's solely because she can apply the effect more often (I'm not sure if she actually can apply it more often, but my point stands). The item is operating in a vacuum, and that feels very wrong to me. > With Torment being a relatively inefficient source of AP - all buying Liandry's meant was - you can't do the things your mage is expected to do - even if you've correctly identified there are high value targets on the other side to burn. If you're buying Liandry's you're admitting that one threat is more worth building for than the threat from your traditional targets. If you can address the health threat and still be able to be the same threat to squishies then where is there *any* trade off? Yes, you might be dealing overall less damage, but if you can still get the job done in regards to assassinating a squishy then it doesn't matter. It's a matter of killing someone versus overkilling someone vs not killing someone. It's meaningless to go from overkill to just enough to kill. >There are a ton of options that exist that can further enhance what your mage is supposed to do - so Torment sandbagging you in this aspect meant that it's not an option when you want to choose to react to your opponent. Torment does not need a built-in penalty in order for there to be a huge contrast to another potential item buy. Maybe there's a misunderstanding here. I'm not saying that Liandry's should make you worse off than when you didn't have the item. It should still make you more effective than before at killing low health targets, but not as much as a death cap. It's still opportunity cost, not a net loss in any situation. >Flat Penetration, generally speaking, acts as a target focus. It doesn't currently but that's due to it being entirely item driven rather than kit driven. The more you rely on Flat Penetration - the smaller your available pool of targets gets. To clarify then: You intend for Liandry's to be a niche item for addressing high health and low MR? The flat mpen on the item is intended to work towards the goal of focusing on low MR targets, correct? >% Penetration, on the other hand, broadens your range of targets and makes you more agnostic to who you're actually fighting. I know you said that penetration needs work, but this seems like a red flag to me. The two concepts - % and flat pen - are intended to have opposing goals, yet currently building one makes the other more effective due to calculation order. Since most damage in the game interacts so heavily with penetrations perhaps solidifying the role and correct implementation of that role should be prioritized. >We're using both of these statistics pretty poorly at the moment, to be perfectly honest - but it'll require a deeper pass to get this one right. I'm glad you recognize there's an issue here, but I know it's a separate discussion so I'll try to keep this relevant to my point. In your mind do you think that penetration is and/or should be a responsive stat or a core stat?
Let's go over your original pitch one more time: > Your abilities deal X% less damage, but burn the target for (Y*AP)% of their maximum health per second for Z seconds. Reapplying the burn adds to the existing burn. > Maybe there's a misunderstanding here. I'm not saying that Liandry's should make you worse off than when you didn't have the item. It should still make you more effective than before at killing low health targets, but not as much as a death cap. It's still opportunity cost, not a net loss in any situation. The crux of your disagreement is that you don't think the opportunity cost is high enough - considering the relative power gain from Liandry's vs. the relative power gain from Deathcap at rewarding you vs. High Health targets vs. Low Health Targets. > Yes, you might be dealing overall less damage, but if you can still get the job done in regards to assassinating a squishy then it doesn't matter. By purchasing Torment, you gain 80 AP and a current health burn that is only full power when you have a slow effect. By purchasing Deathcap, you gain (162 AP + 35% of your remaining AP). If you fundamentally believe that there is no difference between these two items and your actual game performance in terms of being able to get the job done in murdering a squishy - we're going to have to kind of agree to disagree as we're essentially arguing at degrees here back and forth. > I know you said that penetration needs work, but this seems like a red flag to me. The two concepts - % and flat pen - are intended to have opposing goals, yet currently building one makes the other more effective due to calculation order. Regardless of how you calculate penetration and % penetration orders - you will always amplify the effects of the other. The net effect is that you are going to be better at countering resistances - in general. So the decision here mostly comes down to whether or not you want to punish players for changing paths or not - and how powerful their first purchase should be at deciding the rest of the game. > Since most damage in the game interacts so heavily with penetrations perhaps solidifying the role and correct implementation of that role should be prioritized. I think this statement and neatly encapsulates most of our disagreements actually. If either of us read that statement - the next step is obvious - however, we'll draw completely different conclusions from it. The correct implementation of penetration for me reading that - is one that punishes the player the least when they have to change their decisions down the line. Since Penetration is so important to the overall damage curve - the net negative effect to the player could be enormous if he chooses wrong and has to react to his opponent - hence, it needs to be more lenient. However, by your statement - the correct implementation of penetration is the one that punishes the player more for not concentrating his focus and thus, if he guessed wrong - he should be setting himself up for a future build that is less effective than either focused build. You have a completely valid philosophy that whatever decisions you make should keep narrow'ing the focus of your character and close him off from other paths. This makes a ton of sense in a lot of other archetypes with multiple units or fast respecc'ing. However, I fundamentally disagree with you that it is healthy for a 5v5 game without fast respecs. While item decision making is a skill to be rewarded - you have to ask yourself how rewarding it should be relative to all the other skills that are going on in the game and how rewarding or punishing it should be to make a mistake in this skillset. The thing to keep in mind is that rewards for particular types of skills are zero sum. The more important you make champion / comp selection - the less your in-game lane/strategic decisions matter. The more you reward macro or strategic decisions - the less your micro tactical decisions can matter. The more you reward correct itemization decisions - the less you reward dexterity and finesse in combat. Ignoring all that though - Let me keep stressing that I agree with you that this is a huge power push for Liandry's - and potentially in the wrong direction. I am admittedly pushing Liandry's much harder than I would usually be comfortable with were it not for the current environment of the game. Let's just leave it at that. :P
So.... you cleaned up things like {{item:3153}} by making 2 {{item:1042}} build into {{item:1043}}, and talked about doing other similar clean ups. And now we move onto AP and your solution to is to make multiple items build out of 3? GJ Rito! 10 / 10. Would go play some other game instead.
I can totally understand your frustration here - 3 component items are hardly ideal. However, there's a few reasons why this is fairly different from that case: 1. Recurve Bow became an on-hit item - and became the default root item for on-hits. While this is cleanup - it's one that serves the purpose of establishing a consistent base for a set of items. 2. Attack Speed is a relatively narrow statistic that builds into a few items - it's also a very focused statistic that doesn't really work well alone. Hence the merging allows us to add other functions that do function well with Attack Speed while you are sitting on it in the interim. By contrast - Ability Power is a fairly broad statistic that is widely applicable because of the skills on your kit. That said, I'd also like to go into this a little more about why we make inconsistent decisions at times: You can think of it like this: Certain decisions are designed to make room. Cleaning up - typically involves removing overly complex elements that aren't doing its job to make room for more complexity. However, the point of clean up is to make room for more things that take up complexity. One earns you space to do work. One consumes the space for, hopefully, a better purpose than the original room was taking up. Overall, it's a recognition that you only have so much stuff to work with. Does this mean that every project that doesn't make room is pointless or inconsistent? The point of making room and cleaning things up is to consume it for gains. In this case, in particular - The experiment is to introduce a wider array of possible build steps at the 1200 G limit (Codex/Wand/Wisp + Book) vs. NLR. In the long run - we will probably clean this up as well to make room for more complexity into a more elegant state - but for now with this light pass - we're going to spend a little bit of the room we made to play around with seeing if we can get gains in making an interesting set of items to buy at this price point.
Have you considered Lich Bane for these changes? Also, regarding Rylai's: will Sona's Q become a 40% slow for 1 second for 20% slow?
At one point, I did try to figure out how Lich Bane would function as an 100 AP item - it just got prohibitively expensive and didn't quite seemed like it fit the pattern that well. > Sona I believe so.
I know WoTA is not a core build for someone like Malzahar, however would his damage over time with malefic Visions (E) be a lump sum of health returned or as the spell ticks?
As the spell ticks. Each time you deal damage is when the vamp effect triggers.
Okay, so it kind of (very slightly if I'm thinking correctly) opens WotA to more champs since not all of them benefited as heavily as some did with spell vamp?
Maybe? I'm not sure exactly. I just know that buying WoTA no longer hard binds you to needing penetration in order to function. It's more of a 'Champions that can use Revolver have a bit more freedom in their build when they can buy Void Staff' more than a 'More champions can use WoTA'. We'd actually need to change Revolver for that change (but it's definitely something that'd be interesting. SV has needed cleanup forever.)
new
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=004a000000000000,timestamp=2015-06-19T04:43:45.008+0000) > > It's more of a 'Champions that can use Revolver have a bit more freedom in their build when they can buy Void Staff' more than a 'More champions can use WoTA'. **We'd actually need to change Revolver for that change** (but it's definitely something that'd be interesting. SV has needed cleanup forever.) Meaning, Hextech Revolver would have it's SV changed into Super SV? That would indirectly mean Hextech Gunblade would need the change as well, since it builds off from Hextech Revolver. It would also improve the clarity issue I was getting across earlier you replied to. Hextech Revolver having 12% old SV gets converted into 15% Super SV (might as well call it True SV?) has no real comparison since they are apples and oranges. Something like Hextech Revolver having 8%-10% Super SV would help improve that clarity.
No, this type of spell vamp would be a poor fit on revolver as the key issue to address is the fact that Spell Vamp early on Mana champions is terrible due to the fact that they're spending Mana to return a Health resource - whereas Manaless characters only have to expend a CDR charge. Thus - we'd have to figure out some kind of trigger that both types of characters have a definite limit to (like, tying most of the health restoration to minion kill or something) - in order to smooth out the discrepencies between types. A terrible example would be something like perhaps, X% Spell Vamp - but some sort of flat health recovery on murdering minions that then disappears when you upgrade the item - evening out the distribution between Manaless and Mana users as Mana users can still get the sustain via killing the minion via basic attacks. The problem with Revolver isn't that you need penetration or whatever - it's that we can only balance Revolver to be good on Manaless mages because it implicitly offers so much more to them than other types of Mages.
new
Ah, I understand and agree as well on Hextech Revolver. One issue I would like to address is your ideas around changing Hextech Gunblade, in the some time future. First of all, alot of people are asking if Gunblade is going to get the same treatment as WoTAs because Gunblade is a legendary item, a full completed item, so I don't see why it cannot get Super Spell Vamp. i.e. the same amount as WoTA's 15%. If Gunblade isn't going to get Super Spell vamp, then the idea of changing it to heal 12% from all damage sources is flat out underwhelming when it is still post-mitigation. As someone that actively enjoys discussing about Akali's balance since Season 1, Akali is super reliant on Gunblade and is balanced around having this item in her inventory ever since Season 1. **The idea you had to change Gunblade to heal 12% from all damage sources basically just reads as the old 20% SV is getting reduced significantly to 12% SV, since it is still post-mitigation. You might as well not change Gunblade at all then** if that is the case, because it is a flat-out nerf to Akali's only form of survivability. It has been tuned to be at ~35% on Akali since Season 1 post-mitigation. This is more of the case, that hybrid champions don't actually work that well, or aren't designed correctly in the first place. Akali is not really a fully-operating hybrid champion. She still buys full AP items, except for Gunblade, which is the only hybrid item in there. So for Akali, the case of "you don't need to care about what types of damage you deal (even item procs) - but you do need to care about how much overall damage you deal" in terms of Gunblade doesn't work for Akali. Currently, Akali indeed does buy Void Staff to chain with Gunblade in order for her sustain to mean something in teamfights. I don't see any other champion effectively buying Gunblade all the time, and as dependent on it as Akali is. It is the item that dictates her balance quite frankly. TLDR - Leaving Gunblade alone is the best idea if it is still post-mitigation. On-hit magic sources gain so little from the change in the first place.
Again - I haven't though through the end results of SV or what we'd need. I was just throwing out random numbers. Obviously we'd need to figure out some kind of numbers tuning to make sure that before and after healing efficiency are close to where we'd like it - and if it's too weak, we'd adjust. There's probably some % that makes the concept work but it's something I'd have to deep dive for the moment to adjust.
new
Thanks for the reply, I guess that gives some comfort. On the note about hybrids, do you guys have any plans on hybrids in League of Legends? I.e. Is it easier and better for design if existing hybrid champions are redesigned so that their scaling and itemisation is focussed on one type of scaling? I.e. Either AP or AD but not both?
I don't work on champion design or update - so I can't answer that. Sorry. :P
Regarding the concern of mana users' access to spell vamp: How do you feel about your itemization strength/options for manaless casters? It seems these champions' kits are designed around their fact that they're manaless (less reliable CC than mana users, less reliable poke, less range, etc), with the implied upside being that they don't have to spend gold on mana. However, with new RoA offering 100 more HP than Rylai's and just as much AP for 300 gold cheaper, while also solving most champs' mana problems, where are manaless champions to look to bear out the itemization advantage to offset their other disadvantages? I think spell vamp's supposed to have been that stat, but even then you don't see Kennen build it, and you could argue Katarina builds it simply to get at the rest of gunblade's stats/active. Some manaless CDR options for mages would be really awesome too, as currently Morello/Athene's just dominates everything else. Not only would it help manaless casters, but it would also help the RoA/Seraph's champs. Build Diversity!
> [{quoted}](name=Mandang0,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=q2694bqE,comment-id=004a000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2015-06-19T18:52:09.710+0000) > > Regarding the concern of mana users' access to spell vamp: How do you feel about your itemization strength/options for manaless casters? > > It seems these champions' kits are designed around their fact that they're manaless (less reliable CC than mana users, less reliable poke, less range, etc), with the implied upside being that they don't have to spend gold on mana. However, with new RoA offering 100 more HP than Rylai's and just as much AP for 300 gold cheaper, while also solving most champs' mana problems, where are manaless champions to look to bear out the itemization advantage to offset their other disadvantages? I think spell vamp's supposed to have been that stat, but even then you don't see Kennen build it, and you could argue Katarina builds it simply to get at the rest of gunblade's stats/active. > > Some manaless CDR options for mages would be really awesome too, as currently Morello/Athene's just dominates everything else. Not only would it help manaless casters, but it would also help the RoA/Seraph's champs. Build Diversity! Athenes is already great with Roa/Seraph builders, though, and any AP/cdr item would buff the hell outta manaless champs. \>Cdr \>More mana regen from your mana -> spam forever, especially on champs like AP kog, who really don't run oom in fights even spamming ult, because of the 33% mana refund on assist/kill. \>MR synnergizes with RoA's hp
That's all fine and well, but it doesn't address the problem I raised. If I want CDR as a RoA/Seraph's builder, I either have to spend another item on mana (Athene's/Morello) or I have to spend another item on pure defense (Glacial/Kindle upgrades). This is in contrast to mana regen users who are usually fine on just one mana regen item, which also provides half of the CDR they need to get to cap. While Athene's+RoA might work, it also puts you 5500 gold into your build before you even start on your deathcap/luden's or void staff. This is exceptionally slow - 5500 gold in a mana regen build gets you Morello+Luden's! Also, manaless champs _as a class_ could probably use the buff, imo. Sure Kat's a problem, but that's because she has AOE resets (which also sorta remove the need for CDR). Vlad's a problem, but that's because he sustains like a monster. The solution is to nerf both of them, rather than holding back all the other manaless APs and non-mana-regen casters on the account of 2 champions. Morde's dumpster right now, and CDR has a downside for energy champs that it runs them out of resource faster.
I'm aware of the itemization hole that exists for a valid option for CDR after one of the two large Mana items - that wasn't the goal of this pass - as I was specifically trying to break up a specific set of items that drowned out almost every other AP option. > The solution is to nerf both of them, rather than holding back all the other manaless APs I mean, yes and no. There's about 6 Manaless APs in total. Kat/Rumble/Vlad are fine. Akali/Kennen are energy based so CDR wouldn't even help them. And then you have Mordekaiser. It's not really 'holding back' the other manaless APs - more so that they *are* the entire bulk of Manaless APs. > non-mana-regen casters While this is a class of characters - there are far less casters than at first glance. A lot of Mana based characters (Karthus/Anivia/Singed) for example - would like shorter cooldowns - but since their primary Mana drain is a toggle which doesn't scale - it's debatable whether it's actually as important to them or whether it's be kind of a trap compared to more raw AP or Pen. Hyper Spam Casters can often get by with regen based solutions - as their patterns are to basically harass over a long amount of time - and thus are naturally going to go into Athene's. That leaves a pool of champions that are probably closer to either mid-ranged AP in terms of playstyle (Kassadin/Annie types) that find this item desirable and could make use of it - Unfortunately, they're almost all assassin types that are fairly indistinguishable from Katarina in terms of pattern or damage preference - so what the item can do becomes really *really* tricky. Am I missing a champion pool that you're thinking of?
new
Wouldn't it be better for clarity sake to just change what SV does in the first place? I.e. make SV globally like WoTA's new passive? Because in terms of clarity issues, it gets really mathy how much healing your spells will provide if you went a mix of the 'old' SV and the 'new' SV, if you know what I mean. The same goes for champion passives and actives that provide innate spellvamp (mainly AP champions, i.e. Akali and Morgana). It becomes this odd mix of the old SV calculation from post-resistances combined with the new SV calculation from pre-resistances provided by WoTA's new passive.
> Wouldn't it be better for clarity sake to just change what SV does in the first place? The issue with Spell Vamp is that there isn't a one-size fits all ruleset that is actually good enough to capture the numerous diverse styles of mages without being completely bonkers elsewhere. I completely agree that having a mixture of old SV and new SV is kind of odd - but it's become clear that Spell Vamp shouldn't have been a core statistic to begin with. There are too many spell patterns in the game that - if you rely on Spell Vamp to be the outlet for sustain mage multipliers - it always favors a very narrow subset of champions.
This item wasn't mentioned in this post, but it is relevant to AP champions and their builds. What was the reasoning behind removing Magus enchantment? Magus Enchantment is being outright removed, and I feel like this does nothing but decrease strategic diversity. All of the AP item changes have been to make people more likely to choose new builds and not go with a set build path, but by removing Magus, you're forcing all AP junglers to adhere to a set build path. Why not keep Magus and add Runeglaive. That way, you can choose between high AP and 20% CDR or Mana Regen, AOE Sheen Proc, and a bit less AP.
I'm not working on Jungle or Runeglaive directly - so I can understand if this answer isn't particularly palatable. Usually, the reason we remake items is that we kind of hate what the item is doing and want to retarget its audience. It's usually a deliberate decision to go - well, we can either delete the item - or use the existing style or hole to refocus it on an audience we'd prefer - in lieu of deleting it (or effectively deleting it by nerfing it out of viability.)
Man, alright. However, I'd love to see the item stay. I guess I can give up on my AP Zac Jungle surviving through the next patch. RIP. I hardly knew ye. http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/1857600246/49827521?tab=stats
I'm going to take a stab in the dark and guess that AP/CDR without Mana or Mana Restoration is the actual item slot you're looking for right? It's actually an item that's kind of hard to make in the current environment - as CDR tends to be the best damage scalar for certain mages in lane. However, it's definitely a hole that needs to be made - primarily to ensure the AAA/RoA users can itemize into CDR at a certain point without oversaturating with Mana. That said - not the goal of this pass.
This is really interesting. I'm looking forward to the reduced NLR price and building other items without feeling like I'm lacking AP. May I ask how the slow on Annie's Tibbers will be, will it be 40% on impact and 20% onwards from the aoe?
I believe this should be the case.
How do you think these changes affect AP junglers in general? Will this make their lives easier or do they still have fundamental problems that make them automatically better laners than junglers and also the problem that they never gain the gold they need? BTW: Does this added change means Rylai's would interact with Malzahar's Voidlings? Could be a problem if AD Malzahar gets too strong.
> AP Junglers I don't think this will affect them that much in the starting phases of the Jungle. I mostly focused on really high end AP items. > Minions Change The added change mostly affects the following: Elise (Scariest bit here) Heimer (Also Scary - but this guy is probably due in for some nerfs to unnecessary power in turrets) Yorick (AP Yorick? I guess ARAM?) Malzahar (You're pretty much perma-slowe'ed anyway, due to 'E') Mordekaiser (Ghost inherits Rylai's) However, the nice thing is, since it's a separate category - I can adjust this slow value / duration indepedently of the others.
So...whats gonna happen with {{item:3152}} {{item:3145}} and{{item:3146}} ? {{item:3145}} will be removed? {{item:3152}} gonna obtain a new Build path? also {{item:3124}} gonna be affected? and whats gonna happen to SpellVamp runes? BTW This change would allow to create a new Doran Item?
Not sure yet. It's in a theory/ideation phase. Sorry I can't help much more than that. > New Doran's. Probably not for this season.
For Rylai's, does Vel'koz W count as 2 "instant AOE" spells, or a "multi-hit" spell?
I think I have it flagged as two instant AoE spells - but I'd have to double check. Rule of Thumb: If it's usually the DoT or Spinup counters - it's probably a multi-hit spell.
@Xypherous: Is there any plan to tweak Viktor's Augments at the moment because of these changes, because of the possibility of giving him too much AP with the buffed Deathcap percentage bonus? I mean, 5% doesn't sound like a ton, but it could be something worth looking into as a "just in case" measure.
You're right that Viktor is already strong - although they'd probably just his AP ratios if he got out of line rather than his augments. I'll poke someone about that.
new
Hi Xypherous! I'm excited by these changes as most of my champion pool in every role (except ADC) mostly are AP Damage Bruisers/Mages/Assassins, so seeing a standardization of AP items similar to the standardization of AD items should open up for more diverse, competitively viable styles of mage builds. Regarding the current 3 item constraint conflict on Morello/Athene's, I wanted to share an idea I had that could help solve or lead to a solution for it: Currently, the recipe would be Codex + mana regen item (idol/chalice) + tome for these two mana fixing ap items. What if you created two new component ap items that built out of tome and then either idol/chalice? **Item 1** **Cost**: 1100g (65g after 435g + 600g) **Recipe**: {{item:1052}} + {{item:3114}} **Ability Power**: +20 Ability Power **Mana Regeneration**: +75% Base Mana Regen **Cooldown Reduction**: 10% Cooldown Reduction **Item 2** **Cost**: 1400g (65g after 435g + 900g) **Recipe**: {{item:1052}} +{{item:3028}} **Ability Power**: 20 Ability Power **Magic Resist**: 25 Magic Resist **Mana Regeneration**: +75% Base Mana Regen **Unique Passive**: Mana Font (_same as {{item:3028}} passive_) Essentially these two new items will retain the same stats as Tome + Idol/Chalice except with an additional +25% Base Mana Regen stat. {{item:1004}} gives +25% Base Mana Regen for 180g, so these two items will be essentially 163.89% gold efficient (if I did my math correctly, apologies if wrong), which is a nice incentive for players to continue towards one of the more expensive item component choices (especially versus the now less expensive NRL) and in consequence stray away from other high AP items. This also allows for less constrained timing windows to back due to more options of sufficient gold amounts for "damage/other combat stats + pots/wards backing purchases" (really gross phrasing sorry, hopefully you understand what I mean [ex. 820g+ for codex + pots/wards] ) adding to the likes of sheen+ (1200g+), haunting guise+ (1500g+) with now an 1100g+ option and a 1400g+ option. Overall, these two new items would rid of the 3 item constraint towards {{item:3165}} and {{item:3174}}, provide a gold-efficient incentive continuing towards two smaller AP amount items, and add additional variety/timing windows to back for an item component "powerspike" + pots/wards. Please feel free to ask me any questions, I don't expect this to be the **exact** solution League of Legends needs as I have not had any previous Game Design experience nor have I thought of all possible consequences and impacts these two items could make in other aspects of the game. Again, I'm looking forward to the AP item changes in 5.13. Thanks for taking the time to read through my item proposals! I hope it helps! -Raafaa
While the suggestion sounds okay (it's a little bland because there's no real reason for these items to exist other than to save inventory space) - but it's a fairly direct approach. However, I'm curious as to why you chose Forbidden Idol + AP and Chalice + AP - as opposed to a Codex Upgrade with AP on it? Athene's and Omnomnomicon both share Codex as their root item and seems like a more logical starting candidate?
new
{{item:3152}} = 33% on AoE spells This means that if i hit 6 minions doing 200 damage,i get 200x6x33%=400 heal?
Yes. That's the way Spell Vamp has always worked.
Archangels + ROA give way more AP now and at least on paper it's entirely terrifying compared to the AP values of every other item I hope you guys know what you're doing.
It is a terrifying amount of AP built up - but there's some significant costs associated with it. Terrifying but you have do have to stack up Tear and RoA to access it. (Yes, terrifying in the end-game - but if you're doubling down on build up items.. maybe that'll be fair - is the hope. Could be wrong there.)
Create a Discussion
 
Guidelines
Post feedback on Champion, Item and Map balance, new skins, and gameplay experiments here. All bug reports live in the [Bugs subcommunity](http://community.pbe.leagueoflegends.com/c/bugs).