Rioter Comments
: How very mean, imma go cry in a corner! In all seriousness though I was under the impression that the SR VU was close enough to completion that something like this wouldn't be required.
You can never get enough isolated testing. Ever. Even if you think you don't need it.
: Well youre confused now think of how people are confused when they will be playing new jungle items in s4 jungle? How is that good for gameplay, fun , clarity or logic? Those items are broken for s4 jungle. This is bad decision. revert changes as whole with items or dont do it at all. Just limit que to only normal or ranked and ppl will play only 1 que. More testers. better quality of tests. I have 200 ping if i will have que waiting time below 2 minutes i can play all day and give feedback. look how much i wrote just from few custom games and 2 normals. There is more ppl like me and more better than me. Let them help you. edited cause few typos. English is not my main language
I kind of get your core points here although I'll caveat this response with a gentle reprimand that you come off as SUPER GRUMPY (which I'll chalk up to english not being your primary language). We'll probably not have preseason items on the 2014 updated summoner's rift map for testing.
: This is very dumb idea. maybe disable whole jungle cause who needs it right? Its so hard. New jungle items without new jungle monsters? You wanted broken game here we go. And you wonder why so few ppl play here. Cant even put changes as whole, better give it in parts to increase clarity. Oh waith thats exactly opposite.
: That seems rather odd.
You seem rather odd >:{ [edit] Just so this isn't pure snark, think of it as a way of creating control groups in terms of overall build stability / testing so that we can isolate as much as possible. Isolation is key when it comes to tracking potential problems.
  Rioter Comments
: I do think it's relevant though. You're adding in new, niche items, and not dealing with the current incredibly niche items. That's not even talking about the items that are completely useless, like Atma's. I don't think this is a good idea for the game. As is, new players have a bunch of items to deal with, and simply adding in more while not dealing with items that are useless or too niche to consider in most c considerations would confuse them. See: SaltyTeemo, in which everyone buys Runaan's and Hydra on every champion. Itemization in this game is already one of it's weakest points. I don't think adding in Necrobook and whatever the other item is supposed to be is going to help.
THIS is a super cool point and more strategic. I wasn't saying "pls don't talk about those things," more a better way of framing the conversation so we can come join you :)
: What items can we expect to be changed? I would like these items to be looked and worked on: Sword of the Divine Hextech Gunblade (I think it should be more hybrid focused) Frozen Mallet (I think it should have an active for the slow and a better build path) Zeke's Herald Black Cleaver (I miss the attack speed, worked well with the passive) Trinity Force (370**3** Gold cost :c) Runann's Hurricane (More AOE even with targets around somehow) That's off the top of my head.
Noticing some people like to jump into threads to chuck out laundry lists of what they'd like to see changed. This is tough to talk about because it either becomes a) a debate over each individual point (super rabbit hole!) or b) we start at the tactical level but don't really know what drives each suggestion. A rough equivalent would be if someone demanded that Graves be buffed (that's a weird discussion) whereas someone else wants to talk about the decline of wombo-combo burst team comps. Just wanted to mention this - not trying to single you out but thought I'd talk about it here without making a new topic!
: Ok, lets be real. Your company has a history of misleading it's user base. Stop playing the victim. It does you as a company a disservice, also you do great things with what you set out to do. When you do them. But again stop playing the victim cause I'm not gonna sit around and celebrate you for doing nothing, you said you were gonna do something and I'm going to hold your feet to the fire to make sure you don't break the same promises you did last year. You want an award for saying you're gonna do something, become the president and get a Nobel Prize. No i haven't forgotten the initial reactions to the support changes, where people wanted Targon buffs and wanted Frost Queens to be made even better. I do tend to discuss these things on the forums and off them. But you have to be honest here Pwyff, the balance in Season 4 has been incredibly slow. Slower than it's ever been and often times it misses the mark. Again, you made an announcement for an announcement and I'm making sure you stick to said announcement by holding your feet to the fire and criticizing said announcement for looking similar to your old ones. I never said you failed to achieve your goals, i simply criticized the outcome of said goals, which is what we as a community are supposed to do on the PBE. Criticize design choices and direction. While also providing suggestion and feedback. That was the original intention of the PBE was it not? I've done that, sure maybe i'm not smiles and rainbows about it. But at least I'm honest, at least I'm not insulting like most other people are. It's bluntness. It got steered this way cause I want to hold you accountable for your balance decisions good or bad. I would of imagined thats a good thing.
Good grief! These kind of discussions are really hard to objectively approach, given how quickly they hit hyperbolic ends. I'm saying this not because I don't want to discuss these things in a civil manner but because you've created a situation where that's not possible. I really dislike giving visibility to these 'methods' of holding discussions hostage by having the most aggressive stance. So while this can't be the case, I do wish this discussion could be between me and you (but I can't, and I do want to address this): *you're not being blunt*, you're stating opinions and using them to beat us up in the most aggressive way possible. You have certain points in here that, honestly speaking, I might agree and engage with (obviously not nearly as black and white as you represent them), but that's not a way of 'holding our feet to the fire,' that's just shouting because things aren't as good as you expect them to be. Genuinely speaking, it's great and I love that you have such a passionate stance as to how quickly we should be iterating, how correct our designs should be and how balanced the game should be (at least your view of what a balanced, healthy, awesome game is). That feedback with that intent (a shared desire for a great game) is fantastic. Right now, however, that motivation is completely drowned out by what appears to be your desire to be right and vindictive. It's our job - and we love to do it - to parse that and see what your real desires are ("he really wishes we could work faster and address player pain faster, got it"), but that in no way excuses you to be so aggressive in making your points. Not only does it make it even tougher for us to see what you're truly trying to get at but it reinforces this culture of hyperbolic shouting to get points across. We have a new forum and my genuine hope is we can have more civil interactions from it. I just think people need to take responsibility for the feedback they give - while this is a relationship where we totally accept that it takes more sympathy and empathy to get what your big pain points are, there are still real human beings on the other end of the conversation and I'd love for you to respect that.
: > See above re: design being an art not a science. It's crazy tough to predict this kind of stuff but as long as we commit to goals and the willingness to iterate on those goals, our hope is we have your trust to one day get there. Dude anyone could of told you that giving supports that much gold would make them hilariously overpowered... wait didn't Morello actually say that in 2011 as to why Supports can't gain huge amount of income all of a sudden? When you give champs with insane utility and moderate damage that can function on less than 4000 gold in items and carry team fights, what do you expect to happen when you give them 9000 in items without scaling back their utility that hard? Scaling utility also made certain champs insane (cough lulu, cough nami.) I can't in good faith think anyone on Riot's balance team didn't know increasing the amount of gold supports have on average by double wouldn't make the role overpowered. Also real talk, what the fuck is up with Frost Queen's Claim. How has the gold generation on that not been nerfed yet? After 6 months of generating three times as much gold as coin.
Yeesh - this can't possibly be a constructive conversation if it's just you accusing us of not taking action correctly or promptly (and you have a tendency to do this in other threads). Regardless of the validity of your points, you have to admit a response like this creates a pretty hostile environment to actually discuss things as equals. If you don't agree with even that, I'd suggest you try these points in a face-to-face conversation and see how others react. I was looking for your original response to my post but it seems you've deleted it (edit: never mind! Just got hidden from view). Either way, yes, we did acknowledge supports would be powerful in a post-2014 season world, and we took a lot of steps to balance them accordingly. I'm assuming you're forgetting that even our initial round of balance and preemptive nerfs were met with strong pushback from the community because they argued that supports were weak at the time. We still went through with our changes but those weren't enough and we've been adjusting over time. You can feel free to criticize regarding speed of iteration but given how powerful perception is in game design, it's not so simple as making an 'objectively' balanced game when very few people play it as such (one would argue nobody does). At the end of the day, we had goals for 2014 and we have goals for 2015. Your argument is that we failed to achieve our 2014 goals and you're skeptical regarding 2015. I'm really not sure how to progress the conversation when it's clear you have a stance you want to take and are willing to go to anecdotal evidence to support it (which I really don't want to get into). I'm just a little bummed the conversation got steered this way. It's super hard to talk to people in a level-headed way if you're just hovering in the wings yelling us down.
: I don't think that's what they intend to do. I think they want to add more levers to the different strategies so they can more effectively balance them against eachother in a way that doesn't depend on nerfing champions (which always sucks for the players imo), but rather changing some numbers like they did with the turret change to make aggressive push strategies less popular. They need more of these levers to create more diversity, they didn't say that they will make all the champions broken.
"Creating more levers" is the most designer-y way of putting it but yeah. Totes.
: This looks like a copy and paste of the 2014 preseason (obviously not true that's called hyperbole before you downvote me.) Where you promised 1. A baron rework 2. To make top lane more healthy with a bruiser rework 3. To add fun situational items like Ohmwrecker and banner of command 4. To rework supports to be more healthy for the game (10 support nerfs, 5 of their items as well, Much Health, Very fun.) 5. To reduce the power of lane swaps 6. Give junglers more options and gank paths (lol feral flare) Sorry if I don't give my hopes up again. Edit: I meant a Baron Buff rework, it was supposed to be converted to a sieging tool instead of the hilarious ball of stats it currently is (4950 gold per person at level 18, 4350 at level 13.) Edit 2: Also before people want to accuse me of being oh so "mean and nasty" to poor old Riot. It's called holding their feet to the fire. I want them to fulfill their promises this time, instead of sweeping them under the rug again and making the same promises against next year.
It's tough when this conversation centers directly on the negatives, particularly in the case of specifics :( Looking back at our 2013 preseason post ( our big goals were to: 1. Introduce more gameplay and strategy when it comes to map vision and wards. 2. Ensure all roles and positions can experience power-growth and progression in ways that promote skill 3. Improve game pacing and reduce team snowballing While we didn't perfectly hit all of the above, would you at least say these goals were partially hit in 2013? I say specifics here in your post because I don't think we ever came out to say "Ohmwrecker and Banner of Command will be awesome situational picks" - while we certainly tried with a few buffs and changes, we ultimately saw that they needed to be a part of a larger suite of strategic-level item purchases to feel impactful. Single one-off strategic items in a vast sea of tactical combat purchases is tough to 'make viable' without being super strong. In other words, it's crazy hard to promise that *all* of our tactics with each preseason would be successful. We promised we'd be pursuing these high-level goals in a variety of ways. Some would be useful, others we'd have to reconsider for the future. We might get more detail-focused after worlds, but this is why we always want to talk about our goals first - it's easy to look at a single solution and talk about how it's not doing everything, but if our goals remain the same (ie: we want more strategic variety in league), we can find multiple ways to execute on that. [edit] Obligatory: game design is an art not a science! :) [SECOND EDIT] Wanted to make a quick point against #4 you raise here. Nerfs are simply indicative of power changes but don't necessarily indicate objective power. During s1/s2/s3, supports were typically designed with low gold income, duo-synched experience gains, and high gold sink expectations for wards / vision. Designing a champion who continues to feel satisfying while under the pressure of the above was certainly tough but was one we pursued. Unfortunately, with the 2014 season we were like "yo supports are equal" and suddenly you had champs who are satisfying with low income becoming SUPER STRONG with high income. Our AP utility scaling was done because we suspected this would happen but that clearly wasn't enough and we had to continue to act. I'd just reiterate: supports are not weak this season and when an entire position within the game suddenly comes into a ton of gold growth, it's really tough to absolutely predict their growth. You saw the same happen with junglers (especially as they moved from tanky utility gankers in s3 to map-pressure duelists in 2014). See above re: design being an art not a science. It's crazy tough to predict this kind of stuff but as long as we commit to goals and the willingness to iterate on those goals, our hope is we have your trust to one day get there.
: In your post you say "including self", but in the tooltip it says "excluding self". Which is the intended behavior? I personally think if he's using the ability just to shield himself it *should* be reduced - at 14 second cooldown shield is a bit silly.
It's including self. Error with tooltip.
  Rioter Comments
: So is it Shurima's Reverie or Talisman of Ascension? You seem to say both in this post. Personally I hope for the former.
My bad. I have corrected! It's actually the latter MUCH TO THE DISMAY OF YOUR HOPE :(
  Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
: 1v1 and 2v2 produce errors
WE HAVE POSTED ABOUT THIS! See the stickies!
: By the way, there is an error with Lulu's passive in these patch notes, her ".15 AP scaling" is said twice. All in all I'm excited.
: Ninja edit: I SAW NOTHING!
  Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
: The New PBE Community

Riot Pwyff

Level 30 (PBE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion