remove suppression

maikokk·Dec 8, 2014·10 votes·3,162 views

replace all suppressions with channeled stuns. suppression is not counter-play friendly. good day.

Edit: or just allow summoners (minus flash/tele) to be cast while suppressed (like you can with stuns)

31 Comments

Leti the YetiDec 8, 20147 votes

suppression has more counterplay than stun

during suppression in team fights, both you and the suppressor are unable to do anything...and the suppressors damage is limited to the damage his ability does
stuns on the other hand stops you from doing anything while the stunner is free to do whatever he wants
both stuns and suppress can be removed by qss
once you are hit by a stun, thats it... ur stuck
on the other hand, suppressions can be interrupted by a knockup/knock back/silence(?) and some other cc from a team mate

heres what WW's ult would look like if it was a stun

he stuns you for about 3.3 seconds
it also nukes you doing about 1000 fuqing damage
he will also bitchslap you with autos for more damage
or walk away cuz ur going to die
wow, your team cant even cc him or kill him in those 3.3 seconds either cuz he isnt immobile as oposed to a suppress

maikokkDec 8, 20141 votes

QSS: using a whole item slot to counter 1 champs ult seems unfair as the only legitimate solution (unless you are someone that benefits from AD and will have a reason to get mercurial)

as for spell-shield well... suppressions are cast instantly so no you cant counter with a spell-shield. if you have one up they wont cast it. if its a semi permanent spell-shield like banshees... burn another spell first NP

also suppression can be replaced with a channeled stun mechanic. end channel end stun.

(insert cleanse comeback here)

SerBlaiseDec 8, 20142 votes

You didn't address his claim: how does a stun have more counterplay than a suppress? I think he's right; stuns come on lower cooldowns and with higher durations and more options than a suppress.

maikokkDec 8, 20141 votes

cleanse, barrier, heal, exhaust < can be cast while stunned, cannot while suppressed.

stuns don't have to be on lower cool-downs. there actually aren't many stuns that exceed the duration of the 3 main suppress threats. if implemented as a channeled ability that can be interrupted, could theoretically be mitigated in the same ways as a suppress + the options i mentioned above.

maikokkDec 8, 20142 votes

or, better yet, just allow summoners minus flash and teleport to be cast during suppression like they do with stuns. simpler answer

KhristophorosDec 8, 20144 votes

Before suppression was added, the problem with Warwick was that people would switch a summoner spell to Cleanse just because the other team had Warwick. It turned out that a summoner spell being picked only as a hard counter was not healthy. It's hard to describe exactly why but it was pretty clear when that was what was going on.

maikokkDec 8, 20141 votes

i can understand that line of thought except... now u have to fill an item slot

with the exception of flash and tele (and ignite in rare cases of unstoppable drain-tanks), nobody depends on a summoner spell past early game. that item slot you used for warwick? ur gunna wish you could slide something else in there if game lasts 30 minutes

KhristophorosDec 8, 20144 votes

I don't think they ever should have added QSS. If you get ulted by WW or Malz and you die, it is because you are out of position.

WW is currently so OP that he makes QSS necessary, but notice how Riot is going to nerf him instead of thinking QSS will keep him in check. Obviously QSS isn't a well designed or healthy solution which is why he has to be nerfed.

Lumus AvatarDec 8, 20144 votes

It turned out that a summoner spell being picked only as a hard counter was not healthy.

This confuses me. Cleanse' express purpose is to remove effects. It can remove poisons and bleeds. It can remove stuns and slows.

some of these are more detrimental than others. So some of them you won't choose to cleanse.

If the whole point of cleanse is to remove a status you don't want, then how is choosing cleanse when you see you're up against a champ who puts a status on you that you don't want unhealthy?

Enemy has Zed? Get cleanse to cancel his ult - which will kill you. Enemy has Warwick? get cleanse to escape his ult - which allows his team to kill you. Enemy has Malzahar? Get cleanse to escape the suppression of the ult - He's still dealing damage with the ult, though, so run away fast!

That's just ults.

Enemy Darius? Cleanse the bleed stacks. Enemy Nami? Cleanse the bubble. Enemy Syndra? Cleanse the stun.

It's supposed to be a hard counter to all cc. The long cooldown means you use it on clutch Hard CC most often.

Saying that choosing cleanse to counter an opponent is unhealthy is like saying choosing a champ to counter a champ is unhealthy. Regardless of balance, there will always be things that counter each other better than others.

Sightless66Dec 8, 20141 votes

Ok, a few things. First, Cleanse can not remove poisons and bleeds. It does not work on DoT effects. It will not work on Darius bleed stacks or Zed ult. QSS will. Cleanse only works against CC. The text reads "Removes all disables (excluding Suppression) and summoner spells debuffs" As opposed to QSS which reads "Removes all debuffs". If you read the wiki, you can see that QSS specifically works on debuffs that cleanse does not, including Zed mark and Darius bleed.

Second, the entire point of suppression is that it gives someone with certain types of CC a way to function against cleanse. Champions like Warwick, Skarner and Malz have a major amount of their worth tied up into a single CC that only has worth if they have a certain duration, and they have minimal other immediate CC options. Because they have so much value tied up in these ultimates, allowing them to be completely denied by a summoner spell is not healthy. It's too much denial of another champion's power for too little cost, particularly since these are all ultimate abilities and gated by cooldowns. The counter is too hard to be acceptable. That's the entire reason why suppression exists. It's there so that these abilities can exist in the game, instead of being forced out just by the existence of a summoner spell. Without it, these abilities would be majorly gimped, to the point where even including them on a champion's kit would be unrealistic.

NahDogSolRahnAug 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Ok, a few things. First, Cleanse can not remove poisons and bleeds. It does not work on DoT effects. It will not work on Darius bleed stacks or Zed ult. QSS will. Cleanse only works against CC. The text reads "Removes all disables (excluding Suppression) and summoner spells debuffs" As opposed to QSS which reads "Removes all debuffs". If you read the wiki, you can see that QSS specifically works on debuffs that cleanse does not, including Zed mark and Darius bleed.

Second, the entire point of suppression is that it gives someone with certain types of CC a way to function against cleanse. Champions like Warwick, Skarner and Malz have a major amount of their worth tied up into a single CC that only has worth if they have a certain duration, and they have minimal other immediate CC options. Because they have so much value tied up in these ultimates, allowing them to be completely denied by a summoner spell is not healthy. It's too much denial of another champion's power for too little cost, particularly since these are all ultimate abilities and gated by cooldowns. The counter is too hard to be acceptable. That's the entire reason why suppression exists. It's there so that these abilities can exist in the game, instead of being forced out just by the existence of a summoner spell. Without it, these abilities would be majorly gimped, to the point where even including them on a champion's kit would be unrealistic.

However, there are champions who have spell shields, become immortal, immune or otherwise unkillable, destroy "projectiles", taunt you, eat you, and turn you into a golden statue for 2 seconds, yet a summoner spell that can't even remove knockups or pulls would be game breaking against these champs? I'm going to throw some facts at you for a minute. Olaf's R removes all debuffs while active, it is on a 100/90/80 cooldown; Skarner, Malzihar and Urgot's Rs are all on 120/100/80 while Warwick's is on 110/90/70. Quicksiver Sash is 1250 gold, takes up a item slot, but is on a 90 sec cooldown and removes all debuffs, compaired to Cleanse, which takes up a Summoner spell slot, has a 210 cooldown and cannot clear Suppresions, knockups, knockbacks and pulls. Have you taken into account cooldown reduction and reduction masteries? At full 40%, the second and third level cooldowns look something like this, Olaf 54/48, Skarner Mal and Urgot 60/48, Warwick 54/48; Now Cleanse and QSS, 201.6 and 82.6. Trynd, Kayle, Poppy, Nocturn, Siver, Sion, Bard, Olaf "The counter is too hard to be acceptable." Quicksilver Sash "these abilities would be bajorly gimped," Your point on suppression is made where counterplay is not a thing, but in LOL, it is a thing. Skarner cant ult Poppy while she is immune, WW cant kill someone ulted by Kayle, Sion will barrel by when Malzahar tries to suck his lifeforce out and Urgot's swap will be broken by anyone who takes QSS. Not everyone takes Cleanse, hell, people don't even pick up QSS depending on who they are playing and what role they fill, but champions will do things and there will be stuff to counter it. Your argument is in Infinite Duress because I just tore it to bits.

Sightless66Aug 26, 20151 votes

I'm sorry, did you just necro something from nine months ago? Why are you even reading this?

This is the most rambling shit I've read in a long time. You haven't made a solid argument against anything I've said. You just stated a bunch of numbers and completely failed to synthesize them into an actual argument. I'm perfectly aware of every single number and champion fact you threw out. I made my argument taking those into account. You can't just state them and have it mean something. You have to say why they support your argument. You're not going to convince me of anything by making a long post telling me numbers I already know and not doing anything else.

yet a summoner spell that can't even remove knockups or pulls would be game breaking against these champs?

Yes, because it is too easily accessible. That's the entire goddamn point that you completely and utterly failed to address. Other champions may have specific mechanics, but those are part of their kit and they pay for having those mechanics by not having access to other mechanics. Cleanse doesn't have that gate. It's open to any target.

Your point on suppression is made where counterplay is not a thing, but in LOL, it is a thing

No, that's bullshit. Suppressions already do have counterplay. Not only can all of them be broken by QSS, but all of them can also be countered by CC. Malzahar, Warwick and Urgot all lose their CC on an enemy target, and Skarner can't pull anyone anywhere if he gets stunned or slowed as he makes the grab. Then there are also champion-specific mechanics, like Kayle ult or Tahm's eat or things like that (you actually cited them yourself, although I'm not entirely sure why). Counterplay already exists. More is not necessary for game health.

You want to talk about counterplay in League of Legends? Then let me tell you about a design direction that guides counterplay in League of Legends. Extremely hard counters have to have extremely high costs. Counters should ideally be soft, but if they have to be very hard, then you have to pay a large cost to have that counter. Counterplay also has to go in both directions. A champion should not have a mechanic that easily and completely invalidates a mechanic that a different champion has unless they pay very heavily for that ability. The other champion has to be able to counterplay whatever the first champion did to counterplay them. A cleanse that can remove suppressions fails all those tests. It's easy to take, and it counters champions extremely hard. It fails to be counterplay because the opposing champions lack adequate options to respond. That does not belong in this game.

but champions will do things and there will be stuff to counter it

Yes, and there already is stuff to counter suppression. I listed some earlier, and in fact, you actually listed a good amount of it. Here, take a look.

Skarner cant ult Poppy while she is immune, WW cant kill someone ulted by Kayle, Sion will barrel by when Malzahar tries to suck his lifeforce out and Urgot's swap will be broken by anyone who takes QSS.

Exactly! There are already counters to suppression in the game. Counterplay already exists, so nobody can claim that suppression has no counterplay and needs cleanse to affect it too.

By the way, take a look at these mechanics for a minute. Note how all of these are either champion-specific or require you to invest gold and an item slot. That's actually very important. All of these forms of counterplay have a meaningful cost. They require you to play a certain champion, or make an item investment. Cleanse doesn't.

So, not only does suppression already have counterplay, but all of that available counterplay is much healther for the game than cleanse affecting suppression would be. Tell me again, why exactly does cleanse need to affect suppression?

Dude, this is shit I should be citing for my argument. Why are you doing it for me?

Your argument is in Infinite Duress because I just tore it to bits.

Not really. To do that, you would have needed to actually make an argument. You just threw out some things that champions do and acted as if that that constituted a strong argument. It doesn't. You have to say how the points you are making actually lead to your conclusion. You never did that. The closest you ever cam to connecting your claims to your conclusion was " champions will do things and there will be stuff to counter it", but that's a overly general statement and says nothing about why this specific piece of counterplay is necessary. You need to say why cleanse affecting suppression is beneficial to the game, and you never did.

If I were you, I would try improving my argument by using the principle of charity (this is where you assume that the other person arguing is at least as intelligent and knowledgeable about the subject except ). Assume that I know all the numbers on champion abilities and how their mechanics work (trust me, I do). Assume I made my argument knowing all that information, and then make your argument taking that into account. This will help you make a better argument, because it will help keep you from just trying to dump facts without actually synthesizing together. It means nothing if you're just listing the cooldowns of champion abilities. I know all of those already. You telling me Olaf's ult cooldown meant literally nothing. It might have if you said why you think it means something, but you argued as if you were giving me some new and exciting knowledge that should change my entire position. It couldn't, because I already knew it. However, I don't know your perspective on that information. If you give me that instead of just giving me information I already know, I'd at least be able to see why you believe what you do. Right now, I can't even say for sure why you think cleanse working on suppression is a good idea. Seriously, it's not there in your post.

That's just what I would do. Do whatever works (or doesn't work) for you.

Evil JesterDec 8, 20143 votes

mercurial scimitar Silver stash any amount of CC on the suppressor Banshees cancels it if shield is up

its a hard CC but it is preventable, and since almost every champ has CC nowaday its almost useless in team fights

Fury and EmperorDec 8, 20143 votes

Counterplay means dodging or avoiding abilities, not buying items. And you dodge Malzahar and Skarner ults by keeping him away from you or at least having teammates nearby.

Warwick is the same thing as Malzahar, except he has to channel in an even more vulnerable spot. Just because he deals a billion damage right now doesn't make suppression bad, it makes Warwick OP.

Leti the YetiDec 8, 20142 votes

Counterplay means dodging or avoiding abilities, not buying items.

isnt itemizing against something like countering?

like build thornmail/mr or last whisper/voidstaff?

RaptameiDec 8, 20141 votes

Counterplay means dodging or avoiding abilities, not buying items.

isnt itemizing against something like countering?

like build thornmail/mr or last whisper/voidstaff?

Countering, not counterplay.

FyshinaTuxDec 8, 20142 votes

Counterplay means dodging or avoiding abilities, not buying items.

By that logic, we should remove all targeted spells in the game, and make auto attacks skill shot based, because they have absolutely no counter-play.

Seems legit.

QuephaDec 8, 20142 votes

suppressions are fine for being immune to tenacity because they're single target and immobilize the champion that uses them too. you actually have to think about if you want to lock down a champion at the price of locking yourself down too.

maikokkDec 8, 20141 votes

this isnt the case at all with skarner. alzo malz can easily cancel his... and urgot gets to switch positions and be supertank for a few seconds after... so no. the only example this argument is true with is WW

Lumus AvatarDec 8, 20141 votes

Have you ever played Skarner? His ult is powerful, utilitarian, and damaging (it's also one of the most unique and fun ults in the game) but I think it's pretty far from overpowered.

He has to move so far out of position to lock you down, that even with being able to move while suppressing you, if he gets slowed or stunned, he has accomplished nothing. His ult does about 400 magic damage at rank 3 if he has no stacks of crystal venom on you. He still has a form of cc on himself when ulting you - He can't auto-attack, which means at most he can hit you with 1 crystal slash and 1 fracture while you're suppressed. If he doesn't manage to drag you to his team or his tower, your escape is all but assured until later levels (if he ever builds up the damage to 1v1, they took away a lot of his dueling power after 4.12)

SookoDec 8, 20141 votes

Meanwhile, knockups...

TehNACHODec 8, 20141 votes

...can usually be dodged.

Ironically, the worst offenders of targeted, and therefore uncounterable, displacements tend to be much, much older champs. New champs tend to either be skillshot based, requirement based, or have to be standing directly on top of (well, immediately below in the case of Rek'Sai) their targets.

Meanwhile, if Warwick even looks at you funny while his ult is up~

NeidoxDec 8, 20141 votes

item 3070 Malzahar

Hullabaloo907Dec 8, 20141 votes

I actually think all the ults that use suppression need to be changed to completely different ults. The three i can think of are urgot, ww, and malz, and they are all pretty dumb.

maikokkDec 8, 20142 votes

urgots isnt so bad... skarner, on the other hand.

Hullabaloo907Dec 8, 20141 votes

Skarners makes some sense to me, and urgots might not be so bad if it was on a non urgot champ. But Malzahar and Warwicks ult will always be either super op or up because they have zero individual counterplay, but are useless in team fights unless they do a lot of damage.

RebonackDec 8, 20141 votes

How about we make Malz and Wolfy's ults into long-duration, AoE knockups instead? Riot seems to like those.

7ha7guy777Dec 8, 20141 votes

But would QSS be worth building if the enemy team had 4 suppression ults on it? Warwick Skarner Malzahar Urgot

maikokkDec 8, 20141 votes

lmfao. it would either be worthless or mandatory depending on how well the enemy team chained suppression.

JustMyBassCannonDec 8, 20141 votes

replace all suppressions with channeled stuns.

...that's exactly what a Suppression is. Except for Skarner, whose ultimate is a special case, suppressions are channeled stuns.

Because they are channeled, the target cannot reduce the duration through simple Tenacity. If Tenacity could affect Suppression, then a 2.5 second suppress would leave a window close to a full second where the target is free to act, while Malzahar is still channeling Nether Grasp (because it's ALSO a 2.5 second DoT that he channels).