: Interesting ideas! We are looking forward to see how you guys all receive these new Chromas and potentially evolve what we do with them based on any trends that we see and we are also listening to your ideas/ feedback to try to improve! As far as each of your suggestions: 1-Event Chromas: Arcade Miss Fortune is our first attempt to see how a Chroma set that is part of a thematic that includes new skins is received. I expect we'll explore more variations around Chromas with each thematic in the future. 2-Currently not being planned, but I dig the ranked idea and we are always looking at new ways to reward mastery and ranked accomplishments. Personally I think loot drops was a good step into giving mastery rewards and give you guys access to a broad content catalog for free, but we'll see what else we can put together in the future with the competitive team. 3- We actually saw from the first group of Chromas that you guys seem to prefer skin Chromas, I was actually surprised when we looked at who buys Chromas, it looks to us that the biggest portion is players that actually want to deepen their choices with a skin that they already love. Actually this makes sense, when I think of Chromas the first thing that comes to mind is how sweet it would be to have a set of Surfer Singed Chromas as that is my favorite champion and skin in the game! :) 4- Cool idea! the challenge there is our VFX resources are always stretched between new skins, champions and other projects and it would be hard to prioritize for Chromas, but we are always hiring awesome artist and who knows maybe some day in the future there is an opportunity for Chromas 2.0? We are not working on this currently but I could see it being something we try if we find Chromas are really successful. 5-This would actually be a little more complicated than it sounds because of the way the tech works. We are also initially trying to cover a lot of the skins that are played a lot, that way we cover a bigger number of players that want to have a new way of playing with their favorite skins, but thanks for letting us know about this idea. Thanks again for the great ideas!
2 . How are loot drops 'mastery rewards'? Chests only reward you for getting a single S game on a champ and, since you only get one chest per champ, it encourages you to play 52 champions a year instead of showing mastery in a single one. 5 . Ugh. I know, I know, it makes sense from a business perspective, but it still really sucks to hear 'we're prioritizing chromas for popular skins, so if your favorite skin is unpopular or for an unpopular champion, sucks to be you.'
: An Update on Chromas
Both SMITE and HoTS give chroma-equivalents for mastery rank-equivalents, with SMITE requiring you to purchase them with IP-equivalent and HoTS giving them to you for all your skins as you rank up a hero. Why have you decided not to do it in League?
: Speaking of SKT Skins... it's time for an update!
Man, a human-colored Kalista looks strange. Like, normal Kalista is obviously ghostly and undead, so the spears are more cool than anything else, but seeing a relatively normal human walking around impaled like that...ugh. So you're just scrapping the entire concept of SKT Sivir, then?
: [6.14] Cooldown Pings on PBE
Finally. My most wished for feature from DotA2.
: Her kit includes all new particles, as well as all new SFX for her skills - that alone would make her a 1350 RP skin.
I didn't know SFX was a thing that automatically pushed something into 1350, considering how basically every 975 has new particles nowadays. I still think you guys need better pricing tiers. I know, I know, 'it's different for every skin' but your official skin pricing list is completely not helpful.
: > Then we should also completely rework Nasus to only get stacks if he attacks an enemy champion. Bad example. Nasus has to go melee to get stacks and is completely exposed this way. > And we should rework most 'siege' mages since they can just AFK farm from outside your range. Then they push with their spells. You can freeze the wave and engage when they go for farm or just wait for your jungler to do so. >And we should rework most carry junglers, since they just farm the jungle until they can sense a kill You can counterjungle them. And they have to interact with you sooner or laner. You also dont have to **lane** vs them. And this is one of the biggest complaints about Soraka. > Of course laning against Soraka is difficult as a utility support; the entire point of utility supports is protecting your ADC, not fighting the other team. If you are silver this is true. A utilty support can be as aggressive as any other support and usually also has the tools and damage for it. Just because the support has utility doesnt mean he has to stand behind his ADC and be afk (hello, Soraka). > They're going to have less damage than a more offensive support, meaning they can't chew through Soraka's heals easily enough. As I already said, most of utility supports have decent damage attached to them, just usually over time. > If we're going to make it so that Sona/Janna/Nami can more easily fight Soraka, then she's going to fold like a house of cards the instant an engage support shows up in lane. 1. I have no problem if Soraka actually interacts with me and wins. Hell, that ok with me. But if she just lets her AD do the job while not showing up ever and wins lane with this - thats sad and is not supposed to happen in a healthy game. 2. Even all in supports struggle vs Soraka if she is anything close to decent. The only one that can rather easily win is BC, because he pulls the AD out of her range to heal. All the others usually cant do a lot to pressure her. Ignite helps a little, but not a whole lot. If you want to play PvE you might as well switch to WoW or botgames. I undestand that you want your main as broken, unhealthy and frustrating to play against as possible, but truth is - others dont. Personally, I just want pre-rework Soraka back.
>If you want to play PvE you might as well switch to WoW or botgames. I undestand that you want your main as broken, unhealthy and frustrating to play against as possible, but truth is - others dont. Yeah, okay, I'm done here. If that's what you REALLY think I want then there's no point arguing against you.
: I main utility supports since ever. And Soraka is just cancerous to play against and I actually take a team with Fizz and Zed over a single Soraka. Why? Because Soraka doesnt need to interact. At all. Laning against Soraka is impossible as a utility support if she is anything close to decent. And even engage supports are not as easy as it might be. Sure, you might say that Grievious wounds are a thing, but also is laning. And laning against a half decent Soraka is just tilting and I would rather not play the game at all. Champions, no matter what kind, need to be interactive to do their job properly. So if you want to heal your ass off, please have the decency to actually interact with me and land your skillshots. You want to stay at your tower and still be just as usefull as me? Well, thats not fair at all, sorry.
Then we should also completely rework Nasus to only get stacks if he attacks an enemy champion. And we should rework most 'siege' mages since they can just AFK farm from outside your range. And we should rework most carry junglers, since they just farm the jungle until they can sense a kill. Of course laning against Soraka is difficult as a utility support; the entire point of utility supports is protecting your ADC, not fighting the other team. They're going to have less damage than a more offensive support, meaning they can't chew through Soraka's heals easily enough. If we're going to make it so that Sona/Janna/Nami can more easily fight Soraka, then she's going to fold like a house of cards the instant an engage support shows up in lane.
: I sympathize with you on this. I also mained the original Soraka and I simply cannot play her rework at all. Infusing allies with Mana and playing the resource game was pretty fun to me. It was deemed unsupportable for a number of game health reasons - and her audience has mostly shifted to a pretty different audience now. As to your larger complaint about making players happy - but for a lot of contentious mechanics - it comes down to it's a PvP game. The Playing As satisfaction cases will always always be fought or counterbalanced by the Playing Against satisfaction cases. Prioritizing one over the other will cause as much harm as the other in the end. There are a lot of things that can increase satisfaction for both parties - but healing tends to not fall into this camp that often. If there are more specific things that bug you - I can try to talk about them - but since you haven't called out anything specifically - I'm at a loss as to how to respond other than I sympathize with you that main that both of us have no longer resembles her incarnation that we had in Season 1 and that's about all I can do.
I know we've talked about this before, but... I completely agree that the Playing Against satisfaction case is just as important as the Playing As satisfaction case. A champion that is balanced, but is immensely annoying to deal with, just frustrates everyone; for example, all of the Zed mains who have to deal with their champion being nerfed when he's already at a 50%ish winrate, and being unable to play him due to his high ban rate. It's annoying that they have to deal with that. And it's also annoying to deal with Zed in the first place; a lot of that ban rate is because people think he's stronger than he is (most assassins are like that), but it's also because he's immensely frustrating to play against (manaless poke does that to you.) But, as someone who likes to play enchanter supports, I tend to get irritated when this argument shows up. There are plenty of champions who's 'Playing Against' case is equally or just as annoying as the healer supports...but they're not getting completely reworked because people find them irritating to play against. It's cool how Fizz's entire gimmick is 'annoy the hell out of your opponent' apparently. But Soraka dares to have a decent heal? Now that's not fun. We need to attach health costs to it, make it require landing an entirely separate ability to do anything, and remove her other sustain support skill in favor of something entirely unrelated.
: PBE Bugs & Feedback Thread: Deep Sea Nami! (!!!)
This is another skin that I feel the voice processing was added just to justify bumping the skin up to 1350.
: > I don't see why you wouldn't want her healing. The difference in the builds would result in more of the following archetypes of healer being possible for her builds. Glass Healer - who is squishy but has the highest heal impact - AKA - my heals are huge - my health pool is small and I am very careful. Tanky Healer - who is harder to take down - whose healing output is more moderate - I have high regeneration and decent heals + some utility to downplay the necessity of healing constantly. For example, Rylai's Slow in the right circumstance can reduce as much damage as a healing someone for 100 more. If that type of distinction is possible - that'd be pretty interesting. There's also the more worrisome facet that inflexible narrow champions tend to be very very hard to support - we've traditionally had the most trouble with these types of champions as what they do has to be super reliable and then it leads to a lack of play - it's a long term maintainability concern for this.
Yes, inflexible narrow champs are hard to support, but it's significantly more interesting when champs have one thing to do well, as opposed to, say, Thresh.
: Hopefully there's enough of a tradeoff between building this item vs. building something like a Warmog's on her that will naturally balance out... but Soraka is... tricky given her extreme nature. I would love a world in which we could shift power from her base heal into other aspects of her kit so that her overall power level is similar - and then force her to decide via itemization which path she prefers to scale - where she wants to be more starcall / silence focused - or whether to double down on healing - but that's a personal opinion. :P
I don't think anyone is going to pick Soraka and not want to focus on her healing, though? I mean, it'd be a fun off build, but Soraka's entire thing is 'healer'. I don't see why you wouldn't want her healing.
: [6.13 Planned] Adjustments to.. more Stuff! [Part 2 - Teleport / Support Items]
As someone who likes to play 'enchantress' supports, I am happy with all of these. Are you prepared for the inevitable Soraka QQing?
: PBE Bugs & Feedback Thread: Soulstealer Vayne!
I bought 10 chests and have been obtaining free chests steadily and opening them with free keys since the feature came out. I haven't gotten one gemstone. Forgive me for not feeling happy that I have to get 10 in order to guarantee I get a skin.
: MYMU - Cassiopeia Discussion
Oh thank god I am so happy you removed W's fixed range. That was dumb as hell. At the very least, I can cast W at minimum range and feel like it can contribute to a fight at mid range.
Rioter Comments
: MYMU - Cassiopeia Discussion
I haven't played any more games with new Cass (the 20+ minute queue times are killer) but I just wanted to ask a question about new W: Why do you want to make a spell that's so incredibly powerful that it has to be balanced by making it REALLY hard to use? Like, yes, I understand that you want to add in points of mastery, so good Cass players can show off how good they are and feel good about mastering this champ and the skill, but I don't see how that's a good idea. If Cass can't use her W correctly, then she's going to have a bad time. If she can use her W correctly, then her opponent has a bad time. It doesn't matter how skilled the opponent is, it only matters how skilled the Cass player is. It's the same problem I have with Yasuo; you don't feel like you succeeded when you successfully tag him with something, you feel like your opponent failed. It's not a fun feeling, and I don't see why you're adding more of it.
: We're pretty committed to it being a bonus, so we'll be trying to tune it appropriately.
Please raise the numbers. Around mid game, people are finishing their tier 2 boots and you're still below that. Combine that with the prevalence of move speed on normal items and it's really hard to escape.
: MYMU - Cassiopeia Discussion
Maybe it was just because of the enemies I was fighting (burst mages and control mages) but I didn't really feel like I could do anything. I couldn't kill the Annie or Veigar because they could just burst me down before I could kill them and I couldn't close in on the Zyra or Jhin because she had Rylai's and he was Jhin. I really feel like Protobelt is absolutely necessary for her to do anything, really. Yes, it was only one game, and I was probably doing worse than I could have because I needed to get used to the changes but that was really damn painful. That being said, Q actually did damage early game, which was nice. W having a fixed radius and stopping on walls was REALLY annoying; some of it was just me trying to apply old Miasma to new Miasma (Hey, I can W over the dragon wall to provide vision!... Or not.) but I felt it was completely useless once in a fight; it was good at preventing a fight from happening or preventing an escape (assuming they didn't just dash over it) but I felt I had two abilities while in a fight, which is an annoying change. Her ult's still terrible, by the way! It's inconsistent and all of the 'outplay' potential is in your opponent's hands. It doesn't feel like you succeed at your job: it feels like your opponent failed. Currently, I like the ideas behind this rework, but I think the numbers are off, and you need to relook at W and R.
: I'd buy that we've undershot his current healing amount, underestimating the strength of grevious wounds. If grevious wounds appears in the vast majority of Vladimir games (and that seems likely), then I think we can justify some balance changes targeted at increasing his healing. Please continue to keep an eye on this!
And this is why Grevious Wounds is a bad mechanic. If he heals an amount that is acceptable with GW on, he's going to heal for way too much if they cannot apply GW. Likewise, if he heals an amount that's not bonkers with GW off, he's going to feel terrible with GW on. Just remove it already.
: MYMU - Zyra discussion
I have no idea what range my Q and E can spawn plants. It's weird. But I really enjoy the new passive.
: > I think I mostly got offended by the whole 'immobile mages don't take skill, you just out stat check enemies.' I probably read that wrong, anyway. My bad. From what I've seen of your posts - You're actually very reasonable and think through things quite deeply. I'm probably more at fault here in terms of word choice and setting you off. I'm a bit overwhelmed responding to this level of posts - and so the usual care I have in crafting my posts is probably lost as well. I don't have the same amount of time to edit and choose my words more carefully. (I'm actually **very** acerbic in real life.) My apologies for offending you but I will say - I love the discussions nonetheless - it's always incredibly helpful to have my assumptions challenged directly as that's what gets me out of my Ivory Tower more often or not. > 'ranged champions have to figure out how to position correctly' I'm just going by how many people can orb-walk well, to be honest. Which is.. well.. kind of limited.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=79cto3EB,comment-id=00de00010000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-04-12T05:10:44.974+0000) > > From what I've seen of your posts - You're actually very reasonable and think through things quite deeply. I'm probably more at fault here in terms of word choice and setting you off. > > I'm a bit overwhelmed responding to this level of posts - and so the usual care I have in crafting my posts is probably lost as well. I don't have the same amount of time to edit and choose my words more carefully. (I'm actually **very** acerbic in real life.) > > My apologies for offending you but I will say - I love the discussions nonetheless - it's always incredibly helpful to have my assumptions challenged directly as that's what gets me out of my Ivory Tower more often or not. Thanks, but I probably just get oversensetive and defensive when talking about my favorite champs. (Seriously, check out the Cass thread. I had to type my comment out three times because it kept coming out too whiny and I STILL got downvoted to oblivion.) > I'm just going by how many people can orb-walk well, to be honest. > > Which is.. well.. kind of limited. This is probably just me sounding arrogant , but orb-walking isn't really skill either. It's basically just a measure of 'do you know what to do y/n?' and unless you're Kalista or Kog'maw the mechanics aren't that simple. (Or you're me and forget that orb walking is a thing as you run away from the tank in panic and it takes you a couple of seconds to remember that you're Ashe.)
: > Then why is Soraka the only champion that I've actually gotten people calling me cancer for picking? I couldn't tell you why anecdotally this is true - she is one of the characters that I call out for actually reversing the effects of whatever you do - rather than mitigating it, however. > Soraka, Janna, Lulu, etc. are all very unfun to play against. Let's say I concede this point here - it still wouldn't mean that artillery champions should have this strength either. > I'd say it's more like saying 'we're trying to cut down on cases of face punching in the future' while not stopping known face punchers because they have fun punching people in the face. If it's a complaint about prioritization - I can sympathize with this. I know that I have my fair share of champion classes that I'm particularly annoyed by that I would rather address - however, that wasn't the target group for this patch update. We decided to work on mages and so I'm taking the opportunity to try to address some of the unmaintainable aspects of the classes' itemization that I see. If we worked on Assassins, even if siege mages or support mages were annoying as hell - I would be doing the same - and looking at Assassin work or support work. Part of this is due to an easier ability to tune things related to each other if they change close together - part of this is just that it just has some synergy. > Supports, including most of the hook champs, don't have to worry about running out of mana with these new rules. Actually, the hook champions would likely not have an association with MP/5 given the above statements. Hook champions tend to be more selfish rather than team supportive - and many of them are more closely aligned to tank itemization (flat mana) than support magae one (MP/5). Given that MP/5 + CDR are bound to mostly items that support your team - the common support hooks are more closely aligned to Mana/Tank itemization rather than MP/5 Support Mage itemization. As far as mage supports go - by binding their itemization tightly to MP/5 - it also means that we have a fairly strong balancing lever for how 'infinite' is 'infinite.' Simply because they're the ones with the most access to MP/5 doesn't mean that we have to provide them with the same level of sustain before. We know there's a glut of sustain in the bot lane and there's some light associated changes to bring that more in line. > I don't see why Ziggs constantly clearing waves with E and Q is bad but Sivir doing it with Q and W is okay. It just seems hypocritical and unfair. Potentially - but taking this stance means that you don't fix anything unless you delete everything at once. It's one of those stances that is more morally defensible at the slight expense of practicality. It impedes any kind progress by essentially blocking any iterative steps towards a better state of the game. To be perfectly realistic - it's likely Ziggs will still constantly clear waves with E and Q. He'll just do it with Tear instead and run out after 90 seconds (or more with Blue Buff) - but it required more of a specialization into this play-style rather than the default mana item he gets at 2300 gold and thus easier to balance and ensure there was a sufficient cost.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=79cto3EB,comment-id=00a70000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-04-12T04:40:44.256+0000) > If it's a complaint about prioritization - I can sympathize with this. > > I know that I have my fair share of champion classes that I'm particularly annoyed by that I would rather address - however, that wasn't the target group for this patch update. > > We decided to work on mages and so I'm taking the opportunity to try to address some of the unmaintainable aspects of the classes' itemization that I see. > > If we worked on Assassins, even if siege mages or support mages were annoying as hell - I would be doing the same - and looking at Assassin work or support work. > > Part of this is due to an easier ability to tune things related to each other if they change close together - part of this is just that it just has some synergy. Fair enough. Probably just my bias getting to me; I get frustrated when people call supports or siege mages 'low interaction' because I don't see how assassins bursting you is very interactive either, but I also play a lot of champs that assassins counter, so i'm not the best person to talk. > Actually, the hook champions would likely not have an association with MP/5 given the above statements. Hook champions tend to be more selfish rather than team supportive - and many of them are more closely aligned to tank itemization (flat mana) than support magae one (MP/5). > > Given that MP/5 + CDR are bound to mostly items that support your team - the common support hooks are more closely aligned to Mana/Tank itemization rather than MP/5 Support Mage itemization. True, though I am kinda worried about Thresh, the one who most often gets mana regen via Shurelia's. > As far as mage supports go - by binding their itemization tightly to MP/5 - it also means that we have a fairly strong balancing lever for how 'infinite' is 'infinite.' > > Simply because they're the ones with the most access to MP/5 doesn't mean that we have to provide them with the same level of sustain before. We know there's a glut of sustain in the bot lane and there's some light associated changes to bring that more in line. That also worries me, but mostly in a balance direction, and it's kinda irrelevant to the conversation. (On the other hand, tank supports are already picked more often than caster supports, do we really want to make that distinction more obvious?) > Potentially - but taking this stance means that you don't fix anything unless you delete everything at once. > > It's one of those stances that is more morally defensible at the slight expense of practicality. > > It impedes any kind progress by essentially blocking any iterative steps towards a better state of the game. Yeah, I'm probably just whining. I mostly just see toys that other people have and I want. (I would kill for some form of Essence Reaver for AP mages; that is a stupid item and I want it.)
: > I don't see how adding in extra active items makes champions more skillful to play. It's just an extra button to press in a combo. I mean, sure, there's skill in 'did you hit the ice bolts?' or not, but is that worth all of the other changes getting made to mage itemization? These changes aren't linked - so this is a bit of a red herring. Regardless of whether the Hextech items actually work or not - the changes aren't connected. > So, what, do you think everyone can just pick up Annie for the first time and be the next Annie Bot? Of course not - that's hyperbole. Merely stating that the coefficient of player input to champion effectiveness is lower for these characters than others which brings about a maintenance problem ultimately in the long run if you want to see a larger pool of total champions. Either something about the base game needs to bring up the general coefficient of skill such that champion skill factor is less an overall contributor to your mastery of the game - or we need to adjust champions one by one to have more similar curves. > Either the hextech items are good, in which case you buy them, or they're bad, in which case you don't. This is a fair critique of items in general - that the only skill test in items is whether to buy them or not. However, this assumes that the actives don't get better with player skill. And it may definitely be true that these actives don't have a high player skill to effectiveness co-efficient either - if that's the case - they'll likely fail their initial goal and may have to settle for either being axed or just being a choice in the item system rather than any higher goals.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=79cto3EB,comment-id=00de00010002000000000000,timestamp=2016-04-12T04:26:17.929+0000) > Of course not - that's hyperbole. Merely stating that the coefficient of player input to champion effectiveness is lower for these characters than others which brings about a maintenance problem ultimately in the long run if you want to see a larger pool of total champions. > > Either something about the base game needs to bring up the general coefficient of skill such that champion skill factor is less an overall contributor to your mastery of the game - or we need to adjust champions one by one to have more similar curves. This may just be me overfocusing on a single example, but I'm fairly certain another Rioter claimed that Annie actually had a fairly high skill curve on the main boards. I'd go check it out, but I need to sleep; I'll probably find it sometime tomorrow. > This is a fair critique of items in general - that the only skill test in items is whether to buy them or not. However, this assumes that the actives don't get better with player skill. > > And it may definitely be true that these actives don't have a high player skill to effectiveness co-efficient either - if that's the case - they'll likely fail their initial goal and may have to settle for either being axed or just being a choice in the item system rather than any higher goals. Honestly, I don't see very much 'skill' needed for any of the hextech items. The Rocket Belt has a lot of the same problems that flash has (it has theoretically great potential in unorthodox dodges and line of attack, but in most cases it's still a good play to just go forward/backwards to increase a spell range or get out of their range) and the other two are basically just 'press this when you go in.'
: > And I don't see why we need a bunch of mage items to express skill when there's lots of other classes out there that get by just fine on their base champions abilities. Other classes don't get by on their solely base champion abilities typically. They typically have some deep interaction with the game rules that a lot of spell-centric or burst centric characters don't have. The ranged basic attack and all it's associated skill sets aren't part of the base champion ability - but they nonetheless are what allows deep skill expression on any particular champion who is reliant on it to function. We've built an entire mini-game out of managing the Jungle and its associated map positioning strategy - which gives even simple characters the ability to express skill via positioning and timing. Movement skills typically have this just due to the range of potential options available. > Are you thinking that everyone should have as many active items as your average support? Active creep is a fairly real concern but you're right - this is an absurd expectation to have. But I don't expect that these items are giving everyone a dash - mostly trying to align the statistics to be more effective on a specific range of mages. > Yes, skill expression is great, but again, there's ways to do it that don't involve adding in dashes. To repeat myself: If the Rocket Belt works - great. If not, we'll try something else - but ultimately at the end of the day - the goal of the Hextech line is to allow for that type of expression to exist.
I think I'm overestimating the amount of skill you're trying to add here. Because if using 'ranged champions have to figure out how to position correctly' as 'deep skill expression' than I think I'm going overboard. I think I mostly got offended by the whole 'immobile mages don't take skill, you just out stat check enemies.' I probably read that wrong, anyway. My bad.
: > So...you claim that immobile mages having better stats than mobile mages is just 'outstating someone', and bad. > What happened to making people pay for their mobility? Do you think that more mobile champs are healthier? It's less so the principle of just having better stats - so much as **winning** off the back of just having a stat advantage that is hard to maintain. Mostly because - for a lot of these characters, that stat advantage doesn't scale well with player skill - and so you get this oddity of - well, if their opponent gets better... you just kind of have to add more base damage - because that's how they won in the first place. Mobile champions aren't necessarily healthier for the game overall but they do scale well in terms of player skill. Many of the problems of mobile champions is that they scale **too well** with player skill - such that mastery over the champion results in the opponent's being unable to interact with them. Hence why I'm exploring item based solutions here - I think there's something interesting about using the gold system for this kind of trade-off and it introduces a couple points of mastery along the way. As to which specific item pattern works out - I'm not particularly concerned about whether its more items with cast times or more eclectic items.
So, what, do you think everyone can just pick up Annie for the first time and be the next Annie Bot? I don't see how adding in extra active items makes champions more skillful to play. It's just an extra button to press in a combo. I mean, sure, there's skill in 'did you hit the ice bolts?' or not, but is that worth all of the other changes getting made to mage itemization? Here's the thing, I'm fairly certain that this isn't really a trade off. Either the hextech items are good, in which case you buy them, or they're bad, in which case you don't. This is basically the same thing as the 'some champs lack skill expression' you were complaining about. No one's gonna buy a potentially useless item active unless the success case is REALLY strong.
: > So...is this you admitting that you like the 'playmaker' champions over any other kind of champions? How does the statement go? 'Democracy is the worst of all possible governments, except for all the other ones.' I try not to like anything in particular. I'm mostly driven out of a desire to see what kind of things can exist without creating more problems. > Like, I understand that skill expression is great, but there's ways to have skill expression other than 'every single champion is entirely skillshots and everyone has dashes.' I'm not particularly picky how we get skill expression into the game - so long as it's available as a growth pattern that players can opt into. The goal of the hextech items is to introduce items that allow you to express your skill. If the Rocket Belt works - great. If not, we'll try something else - but ultimately at the end of the day - the goal of the Hextech line is to allow for that type of expression to exist. I'm not super attached to any particular form of it - so long as the skill expression isn't something like 'I know X character just kind of wins by default so the skill is just picking it when it's OP.'
How do any of the items help express your skill besides adding in extra buttons in your combo and giving initiators an extra 300 range to work with? Yes, skill expression is great, but again, there's ways to do it that don't involve adding in dashes. And I don't see why we need a bunch of mage items to express skill when there's lots of other classes out there that get by just fine on their base champions abilities. Are you thinking that everyone should have as many active items as your average support?
: > I'm not saying that disengage supports can win entirely on their own (unless the enemy team gets so frustrated with Janna denying their kills they surrender) but I was objecting that they were 'fun and active' to play against. Active, maybe, but they're all around denying the enemy team the chance to do anything; I can't see how that's fun to play against. I'll present to you one of two scenarios: 1. You are silenced and blinded. 2. I am shielded. There reason why #2 is more fun than #1 is that you still get to do your full range of actions. Even if they might not be the explicit result you desire - I am not constraining your ability to function overtly - I am simply negating their effects. Now - this will obviously become frustrating after a certain point - but they're not actively suppressing your actions - they are managing your net effect. You can still play your abilities. Freedom and flexibility is a tricky thing to measure, of course - and there are obviously degrees of this (Soraka tends to be more frustrating due to her ability to reverse your earlier actions) - but there's a very big difference between my imposing my will upon you so you have to respond - and me trying to block what you're doing. > Again: It's not 'fun' to constantly have to worry about a single hook deciding a teamfight; no matter how badly a hook champ plays, all they need to do is win once. I would claim that 'No matter how badly a hook champ plays' is wrong - because if there are cases which you can easily point out that hooking the wrong champion will cost your team the game. That does imply that there is some kind of lower bounds to how badly you can play and still survive. > Melee range is not 'inherently more interactive' when your interaction is 'figure out how to survive in the next two seconds.' Your options are, generally, to hammer on your Zhonya's button and hope your team can deal with them in the meantime Individually, this may be true - but simply being in range of the opponent's abilities means that those abilities can be used. While you may lose individual agency - overall, there are people on your team that can do something about it. Recall, this is an argument about how many people in the game are frustrated at this pattern and who actually benefits. The be-all end-all pattern of an artillery saps all agency from everyone in the game. While an assassin or melee can be intensely frustrating for an individual (and I do mention how they come close to each other) - in the context of a team fight, they can only practically suppress one person - while the typical poke comp stresses 5. > And that's assuming the assassin isn't Rengar or a fed enemy who kills you the instant you know they're there; that's just not fun at all. I'm not going to state whether I think Rengar is better or worse. However, having something terrible in the game doesn't justify that we support more terrible things. That's kind of like saying - Well, someone was punched in the face last week - so why can't I punch you in the face right now? Let's just... try to mitigate the face punching overall. > The counterplay to a siege mage should be to flank them or otherwise engage upon them besides 'just run at them'. If you're playing their game, of course you're gonna lose. This is true - assuming that the objective or the combat space is flankable - or that you can take the time to flank them. Traditionally, when this is a problem it is around terrain or combat grounds that these options are unavailable - Inhibitor and Inner towers tend to suffer from this. There are situations of the game where this is the only game you can play, so to speak. If all artillery mages tried to do was poke you out of Baron pit - we'd be fine. Ultimately though - I see most Artillery mages switching to Tear of the Goddess if they want this endless end-game pattern. Blue Buff will ensure 60+ seconds worth of siege if your Artillery gets it, for example. Both of these are cases are created if Artillery Mages cannot expect to become self-sufficient infinite siege with light investment. This opens up far more opportunities to blunt or interact with them either during their gold acquisition phase - or when they are contesting for third-party objectives to enable their successful sieges. I believe this overall gameplay is healthier when Attrition can be a factor in this - where you dodging spells or the mage landing their spells actually has a meaningful impact.
> [{quoted}](name=Xypherous,realm=PBE,application-id=2EAF660193FA3B668D7234B3AEBB530C5AB7F651,discussion-id=79cto3EB,comment-id=00a700000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-04-12T01:49:18.661+0000) > > I'll present to you one of two scenarios: > > 1. You are silenced and blinded. > > 2. I am shielded. > > There reason why #2 is more fun than #1 is that you still get to do your full range of actions. Even if they might not be the explicit result you desire - I am not constraining your ability to function overtly - I am simply negating their effects. > > Now - this will obviously become frustrating after a certain point - but they're not actively suppressing your actions - they are managing your net effect. You can still play your abilities. > > Freedom and flexibility is a tricky thing to measure, of course - and there are obviously degrees of this (Soraka tends to be more frustrating due to her ability to reverse your earlier actions) - but there's a very big difference between my imposing my will upon you so you have to respond - and me trying to block what you're doing. Then why is Soraka the only champion that I've actually gotten people calling me cancer for picking? This is partially because your examples are really bad (no one in this game has both a silence AND a blind), but I really think that your thoughts on how frustrating the champs that 'manage your net effect', as you put it, are wrong. Soraka, Janna, Lulu, etc. are all very unfun to play against. > I would claim that 'No matter how badly a hook champ plays' is wrong - because if there are cases which you can easily point out that hooking the wrong champion will cost your team the game. > > That does imply that there is some kind of lower bounds to how badly you can play and still survive. Fine. You're right. There are two situations in which a hook champ can play badly and lose: hooking the wrong champ, and just straight up missing. What I meant by 'no matter how badly you play' was that your champs effectiveness has very little to do with how well you did that game; you don't go from 'good to bad', depending on your items, you go from 'I can walk up to you and use a different ability before I hook so you can't escape' and 'I have to hook from the rear.' A blitz can miss every hook in the game but one and still singlehandedly win the game for his team, something very few other champs can do. > Individually, this may be true - but simply being in range of the opponent's abilities means that those abilities can be used. While you may lose individual agency - overall, there are people on your team that can do something about it. > > Recall, this is an argument about how many people in the game are frustrated at this pattern and who actually benefits. > > The be-all end-all pattern of an artillery saps all agency from everyone in the game. While an assassin or melee can be intensely frustrating for an individual (and I do mention how they come close to each other) - in the context of a team fight, they can only practically suppress one person - while the typical poke comp stresses 5. Really? Because I've been focusing on how 'fun' someone is to counterplay. In any case, again, I think you're underestimating how stressful it is to have to peel an assassin, especially something like Kha that is THEORETICALLY peelable, but requires getting close to the assassin. And, of course, losing a teamfight because of a single pick that you couldn't have prevented is not fun at all. > I'm not going to state whether I think Rengar is better or worse. However, having something terrible in the game doesn't justify that we support more terrible things. > > That's kind of like saying - Well, someone was punched in the face last week - so why can't I punch you in the face right now? Let's just... try to mitigate the face punching overall. I'd say it's more like saying 'we're trying to cut down on cases of face punching in the future' while not stopping known face punchers because they have fun punching people in the face. > This is true - assuming that the objective or the combat space is flankable - or that you can take the time to flank them. Traditionally, when this is a problem it is around terrain or combat grounds that these options are unavailable - Inhibitor and Inner towers tend to suffer from this. There are situations of the game where this is the only game you can play, so to speak. > > If all artillery mages tried to do was poke you out of Baron pit - we'd be fine. > > Ultimately though - I see most Artillery mages switching to Tear of the Goddess if they want this endless end-game pattern. Blue Buff will ensure 60+ seconds worth of siege if your Artillery gets it, for example. > > Both of these are cases are created if Artillery Mages cannot expect to become self-sufficient infinite siege with light investment. This opens up far more opportunities to blunt or interact with them either during their gold acquisition phase - or when they are contesting for third-party objectives to enable their successful sieges. > > I believe this overall gameplay is healthier when Attrition can be a factor in this - where you dodging spells or the mage landing their spells actually has a meaningful impact. And I, theoretically, wouldn't have a problem with this...if these weren't the only champs that had this pattern. Supports, including most of the hook champs, don't have to worry about running out of mana with these new rules. ADs have essence reaver and/or Muramana, so you have to constantly dodge Piercing Light/Boomerang Blade/Accelerated Shock Blasts all day... I don't see why Ziggs constantly clearing waves with E and Q is bad but Sivir doing it with Q and W is okay. It just seems hypocritical and unfair.
: > If stat checking isn't a dirty word then there isn't a problem. All successes in this game loops back onto it self. Thats what makes the whole game interesting. Specifically here - the problem is what causes the start of this loop and what can fuel it. Was it the skill of the player piloting the champion - or was the champion just innately strong to begin with? That is, currently, mid-range mages of this type succeed or fail mostly due to whether or not the particular mage in question is overtuned or undertuned. There are certain exceptions (Ryze, for instance - and his complex CD rotations). That is, I could make a mage in which the player could express skill - skillshots, ways to make plays - things that enable the player to show mastery of the game. -Or- I could give that mage 500 more starting health in lane and only targetted spells. While it's true that in both cases - if the mage was successful, that success loops back on itself - in one of these cases - the players individual impact is what caused that loop to begin - while in the other case, it was just a simple measure of having more stats than the opponent and being particularly difficult to lose with. > Without statistical power player skill doesn't really matter. Maybe I just can't see what your envisioning. I'm making the converse of this statement actually. For Annie and a lot of these champions, player skill doesn't matter - only how much statistical power they have. While there is a certain amount of minimum statistical strength that is required to do anything - the major factor is how much does your individual player skill multiply this effect. For Annie and other mid-range mages - this factor is *far* lower than for other champions.
So...is this you admitting that you like the 'playmaker' champions over any other kind of champions? I realize that's a loaded term, but seriously, I've spent quite a while defending Riot's supposed 'bias' towards 'LC$BIGPLAYZ' champs, but if that's actually true than I'm honestly kinda pissed. Like, I understand that skill expression is great, but there's ways to have skill expression other than 'every single champion is entirely skillshots and everyone has dashes.'
: > instead of leaving them a more suited play style of bait into range and melt them when their in range is going to open up a avenue of "We made low mobility people faster yaye" What I've noticed is that this isn't a playstyle: It's become more and more of a stat-check as the game has gone on. Almost every immobile mage doesn't make plays - per se. They hit a certain burst threshold where they can kill you - or hit a certain tankiness threshold where they can't be killed - and either walk at you or flash at you and the fight is over in a barrage of numbers. Because these champions are more or less inflexible - as opposing characters get more and more tools - these characters have to stat-check ever harder to stay relevant unless something about the baseline flexibility of the game goes up.
So...you claim that immobile mages having better stats than mobile mages is just 'outstating someone', and bad. What happened to making people pay for their mobility? Do you think that more mobile champs are healthier?
: > I guess all of the baggage that comes with this reality (AD champs have much easier sustain than AP champs) is just unfortunately something that has to be dealt with, then. Hm. As far as I understand it, AD-focused champion, as a general thing, are more about sustained damage patterns that require you to stay in the fight than AP-focused champions. Exceptions on the AP side tend to bring their own, kit-intrinsic sustain (Vlad, Zac, Cassiopeia, Ahri, Morgana), allowing a lot easier tuning. The downside of kit-intrinsic sustain is that it is not as gated as item-based sustain - for items, you generally pay a (quite literal) cost of opportunity to go for sustain stats, whereas kit-intrinsic sustain is virtually always active.
While this is true, it also has some unfortunate side effects; lifestealing in a timefight, while annoying, can be easily dealt with, but easily accessible lifesteal makes poking AD champs difficult since they can just attack stuff to get it back.
: > but I don't see how siege artillery mages are any less fun to play against than your average disengage support, or a hook champ, or an assassin, etc. A disengage support cannot *win* by standing there. He can certainly prevent your ability to engage on him - but he doesn't win by passively non-interacting - he can only defend against your attacks. A hook champion automatically puts himself in combat range when he lands his ability. Blitz can be a nightmare to fight against - but the instant Blitz hooks the opposing fighter or tank - he's made a fairly huge mistake in giving the enemy free engage. Conversely, Nautilus / Amumu / Thresh all put themselves into reach of the enemy team when they engage. Assassin is likely the closest comparison here to Artillery. Both classes seek to offensively engage on the opponent without any possible action from the enemy. Generally, most assassins operate in melee range - which is inherently more interactive. That's not usually how it works out a lot of the time, given the various ups and downs we've had in assassin balance - but melee tends to invite some level of interactivity. Poke mages and artillery mages seek to never interact with the opponent. Spells go one direction, from them - outside of your range - to your face. They seek to attrition and rarely engage and their pattern means that they will win so long as they can continue to apply said pressure.
I'm not saying that disengage supports can win entirely on their own (unless the enemy team gets so frustrated with Janna denying their kills they surrender) but I was objecting that they were 'fun and active' to play against. Active, maybe, but they're all around denying the enemy team the chance to do anything; I can't see how that's fun to play against. And yes, if Blitz messes up, he gives the enemy tank/bruiser a free dash to his carries. But if Blitz DOESN'T mess up, then he instantly wins a teamfight because WHOOPS your fed ADC just died before the silence ran out. Again: It's not 'fun' to constantly have to worry about a single hook deciding a teamfight; no matter how badly a hook champ plays, all they need to do is win once. (Also, I don't see how Amumu is a hook champ.) It's 'active' in that you're usually constantly worried about that one hook, I guess. Melee range is not 'inherently more interactive' when your interaction is 'figure out how to survive in the next two seconds.' Your options are, generally, to hammer on your Zhonya's button and hope your team can deal with them in the meantime, or asking yourself 'if I flash, will I die to ignite/Zed ult anyway?' And that's assuming the assassin isn't Rengar or a fed enemy who kills you the instant you know they're there; that's just not fun at all. Yes, if they can keep applying that pressure, they will win. I don't see how this is a problem when you have burst mages and assassins who, in all honesty, have the exact same issue of non-interactivity but that's better because you could theoretically fight back while you're CC'd or bursted before you can hit your Hourglass button, I guess. The counterplay to a siege mage should be to flank them or otherwise engage upon them besides 'just run at them'. If you're playing their game, of course you're gonna lose.
: Think about how many ways there are to apply lifesteal. Wait - actually there isn't. Basic attacks is it. You don't have to worry about whether or not the attack is AoE or not. You don't really have to worry about whether or not the attack costs resources or if it's infinitely repeatable or whether it refunds itself. It's free. It scales. It gets applied to one target at a time, slowly - generally pretty consistently. Physical Spellvamp - on the other hand - does get into the same kinds of questions as Spell Vamp does - but it does have the nice balancing point in that it stems from a life steal item *first* and thus kind of curbs the net variation that it can have.
So the issue is less that spellvamp is difficult to deal with because of numbers or something, it's because there's a wide variety of spells to vamp off of, making it difficult to balance spellvamp so that it feels good as a lane sustain option, via Ori Q-W or something, while not making it overbearing as a burst healing standpoin, via Veigar ult, or vice versa? I guess all of the baggage that comes with this reality (AD champs have much easier sustain than AP champs) is just unfortunately something that has to be dealt with, then. Damn.
: Thought I would make a discussion about the new AP Item changes
Annie with starburst is about as annoying as you think it would be.
Rioter Comments
: > The lowered amount of AP available will make the already weak late game scaling of mages that much worse. It will also reduce the value of Rabadon's Deathcap as the passive will have less AP to work with A couple of major points here: 1. I'll be looking at a series of changelists to see where I can add gold back into these set of changes - mostly due to Morello looking somewhat weak compared to alternatives. 2. In a world where item prices are high and base AP is high - we've actually just seen Mages not been able to complete or buy Deathcap, leaving it out of the possible item builds entirely. We know that Deathcap is at a fair price for the amount of AP we want it to be giving out and the multiplicative power of it. More than anything 'end game AP' is capped by the inability to go after high AP items because your core needs are so expensive to get. 3. I'm fairly certain that this problem isn't due to the AP cap of mages - it's to the vastly inflated gold cap that MR has had since the season began. Basically, the high-end defense potential of fighters and various classes have gone up incredibly in terms of hitting mages - and these items have been tuned to be able to be purchased fairly early without a ton of tradeoffs (they are all fairly generic in terms of defense.) AP and MR will always be a damage race - but inflating both values continuously just means that everyone else in the game blows up at a touch. It's unsustainable to keep inflating the arms race. > In the end, the most important thing to me is I don't want to lose the fun, active playstyle of 40/45% CDR with mana regen on utility and siege mages. They are the epitome of what a mage truly should be (in my opinion), and this is such an active playstyle that I don't want to disappear. In practice, we've found that this playstyle is pretty much only fun and active for the person who is the artillery mage rather than anyone on the enemy team. It's 'active' in that you are casting a bunch of spells. It's incredibly passive as you don't have to *do* anything to succeed other than fling spells at your opponents while you are farther than they can possibly engage on. If you want to spec into this kind of playstyle - Tear of the Goddess should be the Mana item that you go down as that provides for the same type of circumstances at a more reasonable disadvantage - the lack of defensive stats and the fact that it turns on later in the game. The shift to Flat Mana also makes it a lot easier for us to provide CDR - as we know that - even if we grant you more CDR - there is a balancing factor always in play. With Regeneration, flat CDR just means more harass uptime. See also: Aram Poke Comp.
Are there any playstyles that are 'fun and active' for the person on the enemy team? Even the ones that should, theoretically, like Fiora's passive, seem more frustrating than anything. I understand you have to have some consideration for the person you're playing against, or the game as a whole just isn't fun, but I don't see how siege artillery mages are any less fun to play against than your average disengage support, or a hook champ, or an assassin, etc.
: > If an item/champion/ or stat in the game does not have it's place in a higher tier of play and is only used within casual play then I think it should be balanced and maintained around that very idea of casual play rather than discarding it for not being used. It's not that the stat or item had a place in high tiers of play or low tiers of play. It's that this stat in the itemization system has created situations where we have to make sure that the early games of any characters who had any potential access to it basically terrible. Effectively, what this means is that in order to balance it for high tiers of play - it has to be absolutely terrible in low tiers of play. This wasn't 'Spell Vamp' wasn't balance-able at higher tiers of play - this was - Well, that means that this champion has absolutely crush or get destroyed in the first 1200 Gold of the game - because otherwise, they have (duo) infinite resources. We've tried to fix this in various forms over 4 years - but the accumulated damage to champions thus far hasn't been worth it. Spell Vamp via the item system has a serious problem in that it becomes linked to gold.
: [Planned - 6.9] Mana x MP/5 x AP x MR Item Pass [Updated - 4/11/2016]
Speaking of someone who plays a lot of champs that would use Athene's, it's way too niche. It's a support item now, and not even a support item that's gonna be used on all that many supports. There's, theoretically, nothing wrong with having an item only used by a few champs, but it's just weird to see such a staple become such a niche item.
: Correct, the brown version is the evolved form. In Kha'Zix's case, his evolved form is darker than the pre-evolved form, which is why we opted for the brown/red color scheme for the evolved (R).
Yeah, but it's really weird to go from something that looks vibrant and alive to something that looks...well, dead.
: ​ ​PBE Bugs (heh.. bug.. Kha'Zix) & Feedback Thread: Death Blossom Kha'Zix​
The evolved form is the brown one? Really? That's disappointing. I would have thought the brighter, more saturated one was gonna be evolved R. Well, good thing I don't play Kha then. Just lost all interest in the skin.
: Hextech Annie, crafting and gemstones
Wait, so, in order to get this skin, we have to obtain at least ten chests? Which means, at least, two and a half months. And gemstones are, supposedly, a rare drop, which means you'll probably have to obtain more than that. This is very obviously meant to be something you buy chests for, but in that case, why not just release it in the store? I mean, besides the fact that it'd probably be cheaper.
: We purposefully don't have strict guidelines because each skin is evaluated on a case by case basis. A good example of this is with Zombie Nunu. He has new VO, but the pricing is at 1350 RP because we felt since it wasn't a full VO script (they're zombie sounds), it wasn't fair to price him at 1820 RP.
And I'm saying I don't like that policy. If you're going to do everything on a case by case basis, why bother having guidelines at all? I can never tell what price something is going to be when I look at them for the first time; several times I went 'wait that's 1350? seriously?', most recently with Bandito Jhin. (Which is it's actual name, by the way.) I couldn't tell why this skin was 1350, especially since I had no other Jhin skins to compare it to. Ugh, maybe this is just my hatred for the 1350 price point and the new sale system acting up. I just want a good Vel'Koz skin that I don't feel overcharged for.
: While I'm inclined to agree in some regard. I believe Heartseeker Orianna's 1350rp price is justified. The lines have definitely blurred over the years as Riot has drastically improved, but 975 to 1350 is still distinguishable. The particles on 1350 skins tend to be a lot more elaborate. Winter Wonder Orianna vs Heartseeker Orianna is a perfect example. I'm sure there are cases of 975 skins that have 1350 particles, but more often than not most 975 particles are not as ambitious. Audio is comparatively similar. In some cases 975 have audio on some abilities, but the rest is just recycled from the base audio. 1350 tend to have new audio on all abilities and AA. Heartseeker doesn't have new AA audio, but all the other abilities have new audio. Some may scoff at the idea, but what Riot is making is Art. Which at the end of the day is subjective. If you disagree with the pricing then I recommend speaking with your wallet. Riot will get the message. http://i.imgur.com/b2qtPpO.png)
I don't spend more than 975 for skins. My only exception was buying Dragon Tamer Trist, and even that was during the Legendary Snowball, so I made some of my money back (though I got Prehistoric Anivia, so I still spend more than I wanted to.) And yes, art is subjective. But you're not gonna be able to sell me a small colored pencil drawing for the price of a full sized panting, no matter how good it is.
: I'm curious your thoughts on that - we priced her at 1350 RP because she has a whole new particle suite, as well as sound suite, and a new model and texture, as well as recall animation.
Yes, and? Most 975 skins nowadays have new particles, sounds are fairly common too, people Riot if there aren't new recall animations with skins nowadays... And, of course, the model and texture, also basically expected! I really think you guys should create stricter guidelines for skin pricing. The guide that was put up last year on your support site only has 'processed voice overs' as the one thing that 1350s have that 975s don't have.
: There is, and it lies more in personality. *Excuse the copy/pasta from the explanation above.* Sona is more passive, and more, well, sweet. Orianna is a robot (does she even have a heart, and if not, is she seeking one?) and would definitely be more aggressive and more of a killer-type than Sona would.
...Is Ashe really all that aggressive, though? And Annie is...well, she likes playing with fire. I'm not really sure if that's 'sweetheart' material.
: Heartseeker was never intended to just be a line of marksmen, or a line of champions with bows. :]
Okay. So why do you have two skin lines, Heartseeker and Sweetheart, that are basically identical? I mean, is there suppose to be a difference?
: PBE Bugs & Feedback Thread: Heartseeker Orianna!
Why is it called 'Heartseeker' Ori instead of 'Sweethear' Ori? Isn't Heartseeker just for champions with bows (and bow-like things)? I mean, functionally, they're the same thing, just with different names, but still...
: Champion Mastery - Level 6 & 7
Why? I understand that you need some way to make champion shards useful for people who own more champions, but this seems like a really dumb way to do it. Champion Mastery is supposed to be mastery of a champion, not mastery of a champion and/or the RNG and/or getting a lot of IP.
: First off, thanks! I would disagree that the in-house testing team is only good for testing if the champion is playable. While I can't go into specifics (partially because of NDA and partially because I don't know all of them), I can say they do more than just see if champions are playable and do more than just play - there is a lot of discussion and reporting that also goes into it. You're right, they certainly don't represent all of live, nor does PBE. As for roles, we do have players who main various roles, and each player is ~Diamond 1 on average, so they have a solid handle on the game and have been playing the game for several years. We do utilize PBE for the down and dirty bug finding, and that's one of the purposes for the PBE. While we have in-house testing for all content, we feel it's also important to get some fresh eyes on it. That said, while not every post may be responded to, Reds are reading the content and discussing it. It's probably hard for you to take my word on it, but it's the truth. As for the huge amount of item changes, ADC changes, etc., this is common for preseason. While we want some initial feelings on PBE, we're also utilizing live environments to get the masses involved with the changes. By having a preseason, we're able to get all of the kinks out before the season officially begins. PBE participants are selected based on the needs of the PBE. If we're looking at releasing a new support, we'd approve support mains. If we're looking to change the onboarding process for new players, we'd approve lower level players. There is a mix of players on here, and we're okay with that. It gives us a wider range of feedback. For example, changes to Caitlyn may feel way different for a Plat player vs. someone in Gold. As for the number of players on the PBE, this is done purposefully. We keep the numbers fairly low because we don't want PBE to become a smaller version of live. It's not meant to be a place to just play, it's a testing ground. In terms of the Snow Day Syndra arm adjustment - that was a less than five minute fix that just required a geo change, no rigging needed. :] You're right that changing a kit is a lot more work than some visual changes to a model. Since we have a launch skin that comes with the base, if a change is made to the base, it also needs to be made to the skin, which could mean creating new particles for both the base and the new skin. Depending on the change, it could be an hour's worth of work, or a day. Some changes may appear more difficult than others - it's a case by case basis. Keep in mind that a kit for a champion has been iterated on internally for several months and it goes through a ton of iterations based on the play tests done by several teams. Poppy is another example of content that has been in the works for several months, and there's been a lot of behind the scenes work done on her. As someone who knows little to nothing about how to make a kit or how to balance a champion, I trust that Champion Update are masters of their craft and have a good sense as to what they're doing as to why. (That's not just me sticking by my colleagues - it's based on the weeks/months of work I see them doing). In some cases, PBE content isn't based on a two-week cycle. I'm going to use skins again 'cause that's my subject expertise. When we first put DJ Sona on PBE, we let her hang out on PBE for several cycles. It was a huge skin with a lot of new challenges and tech, and we wanted to make sure we caught all the bugs and made proper adjustments before we went live. Now I understand that getting content to the PBE and not seeing change is frustrating, even if there's a lot of feedback. Lemme pose this question to you. If we don't make changes, are you okay as long as there is some kind of explanation for it? In some cases, I've seen players upset due to a change, but from the 'insider perspective' I can understand why the change is being made. *This ended up way longer than I intended. @__@*
DJ Sona was on the PBE for longer then the actual Sona update. I think that just says everything wrong about the PBE (and everything right about the skins team.) EDIT: To elaborate: I don't even know why I bother giving feedback in regards to reworks. While balance might change, every single rework that was supposed to hit the PBE (hello Riven edge mechanic) shipped to live. And considering that Riot has a very hit-and-miss history with reworks, I don't like this. For an example: Repertoir repeatedly stated 'sorry, but we're not letting you fight in valor form anymore' and never gave a reason as to why. It was one of my favorite parts of being Quinn and not having it was a big thing for me; at the very least, I would like to know why my favorite thing about Quinn was being taken away. I may not like the answer (and, considering my reaction to most reworks, I would probably still hate it) but at least I would have information. The skin team, meanwhile, has actually changed things and admitted when they were wrong. Good job! I still have my problems with how skins work, but most of them probably fall more into marketing's camp then anything else.
: PBE Bugs & Feedback Thread: Dragon Trainer Tristana!
You've just made me buy my first skin at above 975. I hope you're happy. (Seriously though. That dance.)
: This is extremely close-minded of you. "Riot shouldn't experiment with outdated champion kits because there's that 1% of the players who main said champion and that's a whopping 1% play rate in each individual's games". Nothing RIot does will receive 100% praises. People who don't want to see MF will cry when she gets a buff, people who want to see MF will cry when she gets a nerf and old fossils who take pride in owning MF from her release but not actually playing her will cry when she gets a rework - claiming that they absolutely adored her kit. Let me tell you something about MF (as someone who played her in 30% of my ranked games) - she isn't in a good place. Her rework (The Burning Tides) made me feel ecstatic that i could pick her up again but she still feels off. I'd say that this adjustment to her kit was well overdue and it has me both excited and horrified. Excited that she has a new passive and horrified that her base stats are dumpstered for the sake of that skill. And reading this thread only puts me in a bad mood because maybe you people are playing MF incorrectly? She was never a true AA marksman (like Vayne, for example) but she was more caster-ish marskman. Someone who weaves in spells and AAs for maximized damage. I still need to try her out and i'll do this today so i can have my opinion on this board, at least a more positive one - and not for the sake of balancing it out but because i played MF in 30% of my ranked games so i feel like i can explore a bit more options than Vayne Maynes. **TL;DR** KEEP CALM AND BRING BIG GUNS {{champion:21}}
I don't object to the premise that MF needs an update. She probably does. But I don't think it's a good idea to 'experiment' on a champ that already has well-known strengths and weaknesses, especially when those experiments involve lowering or removing some of her strengths while leaving her weaknesses in tact. I'd like to believe that Statikk will pay attention and continue to update her if need be (all the way to another mini-rework, like Skarner) but I just can't. Riot's burnt too many bridges.
Show more

Hellioning

Level 30 (PBE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion