Instead of designing champs to be easy to play...

SaltyToplaneGoat··1 votes·442 views

... how about make them complex but easy to understand instead?

I've read this line again and again when it comes to champions like Garen, Annie or Yi: "This is a champion new players like and can easily pick up, so we're not gonna change much or make them mechanically complex". However, since the game is balanced around the maxime that every champion has at least a minimum viability (unless you are kicked out to rott like Yorick), skilled players can abuse these easy-to-play and forgiving champs to gain an edge over those who actually bother to master a complex champion.

On top of that, playing the noob champs isn't much fun either, because you never really have a feeling of accomplishment.

Some time ago a friend of mine when he started league was completly turned off by the designs of (old) Ashe, Garen, Annie and so on - and even if he won games he asked me if there wasn't a "REAL" champ he could play. I told him to just experiment with the free week rotation.

Only a day later he found his new favourite champ: Syndra.

Sure, her difficulty rating is one of the highest in the game according to the champ profile, but her kit is just super easy to understand: make ball, throw ball, kick ball, ALL THE BALLS. Even the biggest noob can identify what this kit does and how it works after a few games - all that's left is simple practice and mechanics training. Sure, early on you're gonna make a lot of mistakes, but that's why you're practicing in the first place, no?

His second champ he fell in love with with Orianna, again because despite being easy to understand she had a really high skill ceiling that he could spend time trying to reach and feeling good when he actually managed to pull of some awesome play.

Old "noob champs" shouldn't exist in this current form in the first place, especially when the moment items and meta favour their rather simplistic playstyle they become downright atrocious to deal with (Hello Yi...). Instead, it's just enough when we have a bunch of champions that are just really easy to understand, but hard to master.

Mostly because if a champions kit is easy to understand, you can only blame yourself for failing something. It's kinda like DarkSouls. It's not the game's fault I misread an attack pattern I have seen ten times before, rolled myself into a wall because I was not aware of my surroundings or ran into a room Leeroy Jenkins style right into an ambush instead of carefully sneaking in with my guard up. It's all a failure on my account that I can use to improve myself by learning from it - and that's what gaming is pretty much about: to become better and better at something until you ultimatively master it.

Also, a certain minimum of champion complexity just equals a way more fun experience. What champ do you feel more proud to carry a game with? Tryndramere or Illaoi? Orianna or Annie? Ashe or Miss Fortune? Sion or Malphite? Usually the player tends to be more pleased with themselves the more complex the champion is. Everyone with two braincells can execute Garen's killing combo - but masterly preparing a multiple-ball-ult as Syndra, murdering the enemy squishy and then stun the enitre enemy team with a barrage of Dark Spheres? Now THAT'S something to be proud of!

Of course you can take the complexity too far to a point where it threatens game balance, but a certain minimum of complexity is required for good design in my eyes.

Tl, dr: Abolish the concept of "noob champs" - make easy to understand champs instead.

2 Comments

The Sword Saint2 votes

You're mistaking mechanical complexity with gameplay depth. In general, simple champions have less flexibility than more complex champions filling the same role and have a much higher importance placed on executing on their strategy effectively.

If you whiff your initiation as annie, you are vastly less useful for 5 minutes until your flash is up again, same if you get ganked. Also if you fall behind on gold your ability to contribute is greatly diminished.

If you miss an ult as orianna you can always try again a minute later when it's up, because your ability to place your ult into a teamfight on priority targets is not dependent on flash. You can just put a ball onto any diver and get a free combo off. Additionally, even if behind you can have an impact with shields, speed ups, slows, your ult, and the resists from ranks in shield. You don't need significant damage to have an impact with oriana the way you do with annie. You also have greater range and zoning potential with your ball that you can place on the ground and can check bushes from a distance as well.

Every decision annie makes requires more thought and more care than decisions that orianna makes because she doesn't have the same kind of fall back patterns and utility that orianna has. The same is true of most simple champs - they have limited options to work with and have to execute on them well, they don't have the luxury of adapting their strategy or playstyle nearly as much as more complex champions.

ragnos2391 votes

This is why "simpler" champions like Ashe or Blitz are harder to play in lanes. If I get ganked as Ashe my options are run away and hope I can run away fast enough. Maybe toss a slow or a stun but a point blank stun from ashe lasts a very short amount of time and even with the slows the cast time is often enough allow the enemy to catch you. If I get ganked on someone like ezreal or trist, I have more escape options at my disposal so I can play a little more dangerously and if it turns sour I jump away. Same comparison between champs like Blitz and Thresh. My whole capacity as a Blitzcrank is dependent on landing hooks. I have a few options (hook first, punch after or punch first, hook when they run) but if I can't successfully adapt to circumstances and execute the required playstyle despite changing environments I'm a useless body on the field. "Simpler" champions often have a much higher required level of play and require a much higher understanding of many of the different variables of the battlefield because if they don't play exactly how they should they lose.

Now, one could argue that having these rather "one trick pony" type champions is bad for the game health but that's separate from what the OP was saying. Also, every champ's kit is easy to understand if he's going to simplify it like that. Ashe shoots frost arrows, it's just arrows arrows arrows. Cass is poisons, poisons, poisons. Zed is stab stab stab. It's in the application of that kit that complexity arises.

Also, to answer his question, I'm prouder that I carried as Ashe than a different carry because it's way more challenging to survive 3 gap closers and the CC that goes with it as Ashe than as a carry with a more "complex" kit that involves a blink or dash of some sort.

More from Gameplay

More by SaltyToplaneGoat