I don't think people realize how hard it is to balance league of legends.

Marshbouy··65 votes·3,117 views

It's not just "nerf this" or "buff that" it's "will this tiny change to X item result is a cascade of issues"

For instance. Armor pen on item 3142 is nerfed. Suddenly Rengar Hecarim Zed Graves Twitch etc, are all nerfed pretty hard since it's a big item for them.(or at least a very strong niche one) But what if you nerf/buff a big item? Let's say item 3143 get's 10 less armor. Now it's considerably weaker against every AD champ and is a big nerf to tanks/bruisers that build it.

Another example. Corki hits a 45% winrate because of item 3078 changes. Riot gives him a buff to balance him back out and overcompensates a bit. His playrate and winrate skyrocket. Because of this his lane counter, Caitlyn , hits a 53% winrate because corki is being played so often. Also he counters jinx, so now jinx's winrate drops below 48% and the supports he synergizes with get a nice small increase too. Now they have to find the right nerf for corki without touching caitlin, if they did, once corki was nerfed then she would be underpowered again (or at least when his playrate drops).

Now multiply this by x6 per patch for item nerfs and another x6 for champion changes and next thing you know, some champions just went below 50% and others shot above 52%

114 Comments

Astôlfo10 votes

Nah, obviously the best way to do it is to make every single champion have a 50% winrate across every factor, 50% winrate in every matchup, and a 0.75% playrate (1/132), right?

Marshbouy6 votes

yeah dude. You'd only need what like, a quantum computer ? to pull that off.

Astôlfo20 votes

On that note, let's just make every single champion have the exact same kit and remove all items from the game, since it will obviously be balanced then because no one will be OP.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo12 votes

hey i already said to do that and we can all go mid with foam fingers and pillows and play for 40 mins and the game ends and both teams are victorious and no one loses and we can all say GG and honor each other

Astôlfo10 votes

"and we can all say GG and honor each other" That wouldn't happen unless you exterminated the human race and replaced them with identical robots.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo4 votes

well im full of hope that one day we can achieve world peace and love and respect for your fellow man....

but i have also been told i have questionable intelligence, that im a retarded troll who is high and has no hope

Marshbouy3 votes

Exactly! Why hasn't riot thought of this??????

Leetri3 votes

The funny thing is, even if everyone had the exact same kit all champions wouldn't get equal play rate. For example, I really like the way Aurelion Sol looks and talks, so I'd pick him more often than I'd pick Zed (despite the fact that they would play exactly the same).

U R Good At Game1 votes

Maybe instead of adding new champs they should reduce the number of new champs and focus on balancing and reworks before continuing.

G4LLOWSC4L1BR4TR1 votes

They've been doing this. For a long time. Back in S2/S3 I believe, a new champion was released every 2 weeks.

U R Good At Game1 votes

That is ridiculous. No wonder they have balance problems. That is just bad planning from the start.... I would rather have 30 balanced champs than 200 champs where 15 of them are insta-GG, only around 60 are viable and the rest are just forgotten in the dust.

G4LLOWSC4L1BR4TR1 votes

They were a much younger company at the time. As much as people love to complain about them now, Riot has grown a ton in their ten years.

Nagoh Shan9 votes

The main complaints i have are that riot:

  1. Consistently make the same mistakes over and over. Apologize and say they've learned and will do better. Then make the same mistakes again. They are either legit insane, or just say what they think they need to to make it through the criticism.

  2. Double down on mistakes and force people to live with them saying either "it's the right decision" or "its bad but we're moving onto something else for now. We'll fix it later."

Marshbouy3 votes

I need examples of both that are not the mordekaiser rework.

Nagoh Shan7 votes

Each department does it, the champ-up and art teams being the worst offenders, but from the gameplay department:

For the first point, so many reworks, not just Morde.

They had said that they had learned from the Cass rework about changing the core identity of a champion's gameplay. Cass was an early game lane bully that focused on applying poisons. Her rework changed her core gameplay to focus on machine gunning her E and the criticism was huge and Riot repeatedly apologized.

Considering previous gameplay reworks that were poorly received like Skarner, Sona, and Xerath, Cass would be an example on it's own. But then Riot again changed a champion's core gameplay, this time it was Shen's lane mechanics. From what I've seen neither Shen players nor Riot are happy with his rework and the spirit sword mechanic.

For the second point. Think about Azir, Yorick, Urgot, Olaf, or Eve and other champions that are (or were for the longest time) obviously in need of attention, but then just get dropped to a point where their unused, so they're not played enough to be an issue. But if they ever become an issue, hoo boy, you know they're not getting fixed. It's called getting "Eve'd" for a reason. Think about Urgot, he starts seeing play, and instead of having that prompt a gameplay update, he get's nerfed, so he wouldn't be a factor, and they could do other things.

As for the "it's the right decision" part. Sona is a big offender. In addition to a few of the above reworks (some of which were re-reworked) they quite simply refuse to acknowledge any negative feedback regarding the reworks, and if they do it's simply a brush off. I stopped playing quite a few months ago, because completely unnecessary Viktor nerfs were completely unexplained, any criticism ignored, it was just what would happen, and there was still Sona sitting there in a completely unbalanceable situation. Sona, Skarner, Shen, Xerath, Cass the first time. Feedback is often just brushed off. Hell if CertainT is in charge, you're unlikely to even get a brush off. Just radio silence.

MrWasjig5 votes

[slayer-pantheon-thumbs] BAM! Solid examples. Your first post was totally correct as well, it's obvious Riot never heard that famous phrase regarding insanity. If they pommeled DynamicQ with a large piece of wood enough times, I guess they figured people would just fall for the guise that "No really, we're totally fixing it guys!" When ultimately all they've done is make superficial changes to do nothing to rectify it's underlying problems.

As for CertainlyT, well whenever I see that name I reflexively reel back in my chair with this general reaction: http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/20140806/5084793/finn-water-drop-o.gif

How many problem champions has he released? How many problem reworks has he shat out? (Due credit, he has done a few decent ones...a few).

Why does Riot remind me of that moment from Blizzard "You think you want it, but you don't"?

Jungle Lux God1 votes

I can't speak about Sona, but Viktor was nerfed because he was too strong in professional play. I'm pretty sure Riot even stated that he was too strong in professional play.

All the examples you gave for the "we'll fix it later" case are/were cases of Riot needing to take time to get their kits done right. Look at Sion and Poppy; it took them years to get fixed, and Riot has stated that they took around a year to do each of them. They need gameplay updates, and don't have the manpower to do their reworks right while still doing the other reworks they are scheduled to do. It's also hilarious that you mentioned Urgot here because I specifically remember sometime in the past two years where Riot literally gave him a buff where his W scaled with mana and his Q refunded mana just to hold him over until they could do his rework, and around the same time he got decently popular (at least in the pro scene) as a counter to the mid lane assassin meta that was going on at the time, and he didn't get nerfed afterwards.

Nagoh Shan3 votes

No, Viktor wasn't.

In NA, EU, and LCK he had a losing winrate. His NA and LCK pro winrates were almost Identical to his solo queue winrate at 47% and change. LPL had him just over 50% IIRC. I was so pissed I took a while off so I didn't see how far he fell between then and the MYMU.

He was nerfed because he could stall games with waveclear. Which is a playstyle they've repeatedly said they don't like. They literally took the only reason to play him over other choices, and removed it. This past iteration gave him that power back, but is a giant mess, because with Rylai's he has one of the highest winrates in the game, hotfix level, and without it he's got the second lowest. (Only thing worse than Viktor without Rylai's is Morde without it) but that's a different rant.

As to the second part. I don't mind riot taking their time, I mind riot pushing off fixing things, to then just release stuff that three patches later gets gutted until they get to fix it two years later. Urgot was a bad example as his most recent attention that he got was positive, but let's try a different few. Azir, gutted to be fixed later. Taliya just got gut-punched, so they wouldn't have to deal with her at worlds, and they could address her later. Vlad was given an anti-coagulant and is now hemorrhaging winrate so that he wouldn't be priority at worlds.

They're so busy trying to do the next thing, that they dumpster what they've just done so that fixing those mistakes doesn't have to take time they want to invest in new mistakes.

Jungle Lux God1 votes

The last 2-3 changes he got weren't, but he did have a few changes either closer to the start of the season or around the end of last season where he did get his E damage nerfed, and that nerf was specifically to target him in the pro scene. Even before that he had some nerfs to tone him down at pro play predominantly because he was a pick/ban mid laner at the time.

You are right in that his last few changes weren't geared towards professional play, but he has gotten changes that were geared towards pro play.

Nagoh Shan2 votes

The nerf you're talking about is the one i referenced. They cut his e damage so he couldn't clear the backline in one shot.

The nerf was so he couldn't stall out bad match ups until second item. Something riot hates specifically.

That wasnt geared to pro play as meta picks at the time didnt need to be stalled out like that.

They may have said it was, but that would have been quite the stretch considering what they targeted and his specific success at the time.

420 grams2 votes

But they do this. I miss my devourer Yi<\3 The little damage on wuju didn't do anything.

Marshbouy19 votes

I am incredibly glad that devourer was removed. Fuck bruiser yi.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo7 votes

{quoted}

I am incredibly glad that devourer was removed. Fuck bruiser yi.

you dont know the nightmare of AP yi mid

Marshbouy4 votes

No i know. I've heard the stories and watched the montages. That doesn't make bruiser yi any less terrible though.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo3 votes

{quoted}

No i know. I've heard the stories and watched the montages. That doesn't make bruiser yi any less terrible though.

oh it does ... devour yi wasnt even a blip on the radar compared to ap yi he one shot you at lvl 1 basically no need to scale

Marshbouy7 votes

That's not how it works. That's not how anything works. that's like saying killing your neighbor is nothing because Hitler ordered the deaths of 6 million

oSEXYPLATYPUSo4 votes

lol actually one murder might be able to be justified when as 6 million not so much

Marshbouy7 votes

You are a person of incredibly questionable intelligence.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo4 votes

lol man so quick with insults

Gary B Enkelis5 votes

Check out Trolley Problem Memes.

https://img-s3.onedio.com/id-578a4bf7217fa11520b239ba/rev-0/raw/s-9beea24ae2fa6ae58bb82213bde3734e57c44c60.jpg

A Trolley is speeding down the track. There are 5 people tied to one track and 1 person tied to another track. The Trolley is going to hit the 5 people unless you pull the lever to switch the track. What do you do?

I worded this terribly.

Marshbouy3 votes

Completely unrelated. Just because someone killed 6 million does not mean killing 1 is fine.

Choosing to sacrifice one for the benefit of 5 is completely different.

Gary B Enkelis5 votes

The number is arbitrary. It could be 1 person or 6 million people. Anyway, yes, probably unrelated.

Marshbouy7 votes

the number is not even slightly arbitrary. what the f@ck are you smoking

Gary B Enkelis4 votes

And yes the number in the Trolley Problem is arbitrary. Unless I don't understand arbitrary. What's arbitrary? I thought it was like some random number. I guess it has to be more than 1. I dunno.

http://40.media.tumblr.com/5ffd3a5dfcf9544dd009104dbf97dfec/tumblr_inline_nm0b7aMdtK1rp4qx2_1280.jpg

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/106/524/555.png

It could be 5 people. It could be 10 people. It could be a sick loop-da-loop.

I dunno. I guess you're right in some ways.

Marshbouy5 votes

Here i'll explain. the dictionary definition of arbitrary is "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system." So in this case the number of deaths of people is not arbitrary.

It's not arbitrary because of the value of human life, losing one dollar bill isn't near as bad as losing a hundred because of the total value of them. This is an incredibly imperfect analogy because a human life is vastly more valuable then just one dollar, but it's the best i could come up with in a short period of time.

WoonStruck2 votes

It can be arbitrary because you are choosing whether 5 or 1 die. There is no reasoning there unless you decide to weigh it.

If you put reasoning to the 5 or 1, such as the 5 being criminals, the 1 being a pregnant woman, then it is no longer arbitrary.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo2 votes

yea its the question they use all the time how can you justify one death over 5 or 5 deaths to save 1 no matter what someone dies. but what no one tells you is who the people are , what they have done with their lifes... good /bad etc matter of fact they kinda use this example in the dark knight where all the good people were in one boat and all the criminals were in the other and they had a trigger to each others bomb and was given a dead line if they didnt blow one of them up joker was gonna blow them both up.

but the option that no one chooses is a way to stop or dis-rail the train to stop any of the people tied to the tracks from dying... maybe in that process the person conducting the train might die due to the wreck maybe not... maybe the conductor needs to apply the brakes and stop the train and you dont have to choose which way to switch the lever. now is the possibility that one might or might not die by dis-railing the train worth the 100% certainty of saving 6?

kile1479 votes

Flip the switch when the cart is halfway so that it derails. With luck it will go sideways and get all 6 at once.

dapositiveviking2 votes

not to mention the people in the now tumbling trolley

kile1472 votes

Bonus points!

50000000000000006 votes

M U L T I T R A C K D R I F T I N G

Gary B Enkelis2 votes

I'm not understanding your analogy. Can you elaborate?

Marshbouy3 votes

Saying that one atrocity is fine because someone committed a worse atrocity is entirely ridiculous.

One person being murdered is a crime and a terrible act. Just because someone killed six million does not mean that the murder was any less impactful.

Gary B Enkelis1 votes

How does this relate to League of Legends and MasterYi or whatever was being talked about?

Marshbouy3 votes

Just because AP yi was 65% winrate and really OP doesn't mean that 55% winrate 30% playrate bruiser yi wasn't terrible. (it's called the worse than, or not as bad as fallacy, sorta)

Vistha Kai1 votes

That squishy AP Yi, who'd skulk at the edges of teamfights, looking for an opening like Katarina compared to the bruiser devourer Yi who'd kill your tank in exactly 2 seconds doing 33% physical damage, 33% magical damage and 33% true damage.

Spicy Rice2 votes

He means that ap yi that ran up to your team, q's once and got a quadra

Vistha Kai2 votes

The whole idea was a complete failure, even back when Devourer was called "Feral Flare".

Glad it was scrapped, but way too late, if you ask me.

Marshbouy2 votes

I agree. Infinite scaling or at least crazy good scaling jungle items are just too snowbally and hard to balance.

More from Gameplay

More by Marshbouy