Boards›Gameplay

Quick Gameplay Thoughts: August 18

Frosted Tips··1 votes·706 views

I will bring up some topics that are being talked about and I will show you guys some other ones that I think are not being discussed enough.

Towers and Length of Games

IMO the simpilist to implement with very little problems arising. Just reduce mages damage to towers from 60% AP to 30% AP and also remove item 3512 this will help with cancerous split push by tanks that shouldn't be able to split push as well.

Damage and Tanks

So everyone is talking about these problems. So some thoughts I have on it is that they need to be solved side by side. Damage is an issue because there is too much true damage in the game. Conquerer needs to be changed. Honestly I would like it to be more like Fervor. Another problem is that item 3031 does true damage. I think that they should change it so that critical hits penetrate more 50% armor. True damage was drastically added to recently in Leagues history. There used to be a lot less of it. I think they are adding it to deal with damage reduction not armor or mr but abilities that reduce damage by a percentage. I think they should get rid of any of these abilities that are not Ultimates. Just change them to bonus armor and mr.

Tanks have some big issues too. The Resolve tree is horrible. IMO they need a new Keystone and all tier 3 and 4 runes need a complete overhaul. I honestly think that they need a few more MR items.

AP Fighters

Simple they don't have items to build. I made a post about it about a week ago so the link is below.

https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/4nA4BGWo-ap-fighters-are-missing-a-lot

What do you guys think? I would really love to hear your guys opinion.

12 Comments

ModThe Djinn5 votes

{quoted}IMO the simplest to implement with very little problems arising. Just reduce mages damage to towers from 60% AP to 30% AP...

There's a very important side effect you're missing here -- that increase was specifically added not to reduce the time towers were alive, but rather to allow teams to have teams that had atypical team compositions to still be able to threaten towers. If you think tower durability is the issue, increasing tower defenses across the board is a better solution than rolling back to the days when a certain bar of high AD was effectively mandatory to threaten towers.

also remove item 3512 this will help with cancerous split push by tanks that shouldn't be able to split push as well.

I'm not sure how much this is actually a problem. When the item is strong, definitely, but I think it's more of a niche strategic item at the moment than a meta-defining or game-length-dictating purchase.

So everyone is talking about these problems. So some thoughts I have on it is that they need to be solved side by side. Damage is an issue because there is too much true damage in the game. Conquerer needs to be changed. Honestly I would like it to be more like Fervor.

I'm not saying Conquerer's balance is fine (I haven't looked into it enough), but it's important to note that the closer it becomes to Fervor the better it is against squishy targets -- and Conquerer was designed to brawl durable targets, not murder squishies.

I think they are adding it to deal with damage reduction not armor or mr but abilities that reduce damage by a percentage.

They're not. They're added it because its a great way to increase damage against heavily defended targets -- because it's important to remember that 50% armor penetration against just base armor actually hurts. Unless we're swapping everything to bonus penetration (which is an unclear mechanic in many cases), True Damage is a nice, clean way to present this effect.

Is it overtuned in some cases? Definitely. But people also often overestimate just how damaging it is vs. alternative damage solutions.

Frosted Tips1 votes

There's a very important side effect you're missing here -- that increase was specifically added not to reduce the time towers were alive, but rather to allow teams to have teams that had atypical team compositions to still be able to threaten towers. If you think tower durability is the issue, increasing tower defenses across the board is a better solution than rolling back to the days when a certain bar of high AD was effectively mandatory to threaten towers.

Yes that is fine to have different compositions, but they should lack in some way. Maybe my numbers are too drastic but mages shouldn't be great tower destroyers IMO like Ziggs can because it is a part of his kit but they shouldn't be able to take them as fast as they can while I believe the other classes in league take them relatively ok for their pace. Obviously I'm excluding Nasus and Yorick but they are problems on their own.

I'm not sure how much this is actually a problem. When the item is strong, definitely, but I think it's more of a niche strategic item at the moment than a meta-defining or game-length-dictating purchase.

It is Meta defining because it has caused so many problems since it was created. It has caused more problems than just what is put right infront of you. Also tanks already got an upgrade for taking towers with demolish if they choose to take which I think is more than enough to give them. Zz'Rot just causes issues especially on certain champions, looking at Yorick again.

I'm not saying Conquerer's balance is fine (I haven't looked into it enough), but it's important to note that the closer it becomes to Fervor the better it is against squishy targets -- and Conquerer was designed to brawl durable targets, not murder squishies.

I see where you are coming from but honestly I don't like how it is played around just like grasp they should be different. No rune really ramps up it either does something instantly or after a set situation. I would love a legitimate ramping rune that does something at all points but gets better as time goes on.

They're not. They're added it because its a great way to increase damage against heavily defended targets -- because it's important to remember that 50% armor penetration against just base armor actually hurts. Unless we're swapping everything to bonus penetration (which is an unclear mechanic in many cases), True Damage is a nice, clean way to present this effect.

Well my biggest problem is that you are forcing this item on people it isn't really like oh a can choose the best item for the situation it is like well I gotta get it because it also has the double your critical strike chance. Idk I think it is very poorly designed and that true damage overall is running rampant in the game.

ModThe Djinn3 votes

{quoted}Yes that is fine to have different compositions, but they should lack in some way. Maybe my numbers are too drastic but mages shouldn't be great tower destroyers IMO like Ziggs can because it is a part of his kit but they shouldn't be able to take them as fast as they can while I believe the other classes in league take them relatively ok for their pace. Obviously I'm excluding Nasus and Yorick but they are problems on their own.

They do lack -- teams without marksmen lack consistent high sustained damage, usually have more damage that's subject to counterplay, and can be run out of mana. Given that tower-taking, however, is a fundamental part of the game I feel all teams should be able to take towers. Also, Marksmen still take towers faster than pretty much any mage save maybe Ziggs and Lichbane Veigar, so the strength of AD definitely still exists, especially in the early game and mid-game.

Zz'Rot just causes issues especially on certain champions, looking at Yorick again.

Oh, sure. I just think that pinning that item on the board as a big problem spot seems a bit dishonest. It causes some issues, sure, and might merit another look, but I don't think it's standing out as a recurring issue to the extent your OP seems to imply.

I see where you are coming from but honestly I don't like how it is played around just like grasp they should be different. No rune really ramps up it either does something instantly or after a set situation. I would love a legitimate ramping rune that does something at all points but gets better as time goes on.

And that's a fair assessment, but it's also a different issue than the one you initially raised. A ramping rune of some sort would be really cool, definitely. Hell, you could even make Conquerer into it while preserving it's current design -- something that you can charge up to one level on minions, but you have to engage on enemy champions to gain the full benefit from. That would transition it from a trading rune that you charge up before engaging to a dueling rune that gains power the longer you can stick in combat with one target.

You gain a similar effect, but now you actually have to commit to attacking enemy champions to get the full benefit.

Well my biggest problem is that you are forcing this item on people it isn't really like oh a can choose the best item for the situation it is like well I gotta get it because it also has the double your critical strike chance. Idk I think it is very poorly designed and that true damage overall is running rampant in the game.

Infinity Edge has pretty much always been forced on Marksmen. In fact, right now we're in one of the few metas where other options are viable alternatives. Now, you may well view a build having a core item as an issue, in which case yet -- it's not something that will appeal to you. But saying that's a NEW thing is a bit deceptive.

Frosted Tips1 votes

They do lack -- teams without marksmen lack consistent high sustained damage, usually have more damage that's subject to counterplay, and can be run out of mana. Given that tower-taking, however, is a fundamental part of the game I feel all teams should be able to take towers. Also, Marksmen still take towers faster than pretty much any mage save maybe Ziggs and Lichbane Veigar, so the strength of AD definitely still exists, especially in the early game and mid-game.

Excluding Diana I see she is probably top 3 tower taker in the game, but besides that I still think it is overtuned. Maybe the change should be from 60 to 40 but it is too high right now. That is my opinion and that won't change because I see it everytime I play the game.

Oh, sure. I just think that pinning that item on the board as a big problem spot seems a bit dishonest. It causes some issues, sure, and might merit another look, but I don't think it's standing out as a recurring issue to the extent your OP seems to imply.

Then obviously their was miscommunication. I think the item has caused many issues and that the item and the champions that used the item well got nerfed and harmed because of it. Now that only a few champions can abuse it the item may seem not that bad but it left some damage in its path to where it is right now.

And that's a fair assessment, but it's also a different issue than the one you initially raised. A ramping rune of some sort would be really cool, definitely. Hell, you could even make Conquerer into it while preserving it's current design -- something that you can charge up to one level on minions, but you have to engage on enemy champions to gain the full benefit from. That would transition it from a trading rune that you charge up before engaging to a dueling rune that gains power the longer you can stick in combat with one target.

Glad we can find some common ground. My problem is that if conqueror exists as a tank bust rune than Black Cleaver gets to rot in the corner, so one or the other has got to change IMO and I would rather it be conqueror.

Infinity Edge has pretty much always been forced on Marksmen. In fact, right now we're in one of the few metas where other options are viable alternatives. Now, you may well view a build having a core item as an issue, in which case yet -- it's not something that will appeal to you. But saying that's a NEW thing is a bit deceptive.

You are right doesn't change the fact that I disagree with it bringing more true damage to the game.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}Mayne the change should be from 60 to 40 but it is too high right now. That is my opinion and that won't change because I see it everytime I play the game.

You do you. It was actually specifically increased from 50% to 60% because Mages weren't deemed to be efficient enough at taking towers, and I'm not sure that's a change they're going to roll back, because it was an intentional decision to enables mages to be more efficient at taking towers.

Glad we can find some common ground. My problem is that if conqueror exists as a tank bust rune than Black Cleaver gets to rot in the corner, so one or the other has got to change IMO and I would rather it be conqueror.

I find this a little odd, because Black Cleaver was basically a must-buy on ever Bruiser prior to Conqueror, which was your complain with Infinity Edge. Conqueror offers a path where you can either take Conqueror and maybe SKIP Black Cleaver, or take something like Grasp and opt into it.

You are right doesn't change the fact that I disagree with it bringing more true damage to the game.

I mean, sure. But it does bring less damage overall, and is still fairly well defended against through armor (which vastly reduces the damage of the increased number of critical hits), so this does seem more like a hatred of True Damage as a concept. Which is totally fine, but I think it's important to be aware of it.

Frosted Tips1 votes

You do you. It was actually specifically increased from 50% to 60% because Mages weren't deemed to be efficient enough at taking towers, and I'm not sure that's a change they're going to roll back, because it was an intentional decision to enables mages to be more efficient at taking towers.

Ah so we are talking about 2 different changes. I'm talking about the original change in patch 6.9 that if your AP was more than double your bonus AD than you will do 50% of you AP to turrets. That original change was too much then they buffed it to 60% for no reason.

I find this a little odd, because Black Cleaver was basically a must-buy on ever Bruiser prior to Conqueror, which was your complain with Infinity Edge. Conqueror offers a path where you can either take Conqueror and maybe SKIP Black Cleaver, or take something like Grasp and opt into it.

No one takes Black Cleaver really. And many champions still had options back when people did take Black Cleaver you could also go for Trinity Force. I know some champions it wasn't ever viable on, but at least many of the had options.

so this does seem more like a hatred of True Damage as a concept. Which is totally fine, but I think it's important to be aware of it.

I do not hate True Damage I just personally believe it is over saturated in the game now. It used to be unique to have and only a few champions had it and the had trade offs for having True Damage but now everyone has it.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}That original change was too much then they buffed it to 60% for no reason.

The buff was actually made specifically because AP-heavy team comps were struggling to take towers compared to AD-heavy team comps.

No one takes Black Cleaver really. And many champions still had options back when people did take Black Cleaver you could also go for Trinity Force. I know some champions it wasn't ever viable on, but at least many of the had options.

Urgot, Kled, Pantheon, Camille, Rengar, Riven, Illaoi, Renekton, Jayce, Olaf, Gnar, and Aatrox all currently use it in their most frequent AND their highest win-rate builds. Other champions can opt into it when they don't take Conqueror. It's still very commonly used, basically -- just not ubiquitous.

I do not hate True Damage I just personally believe it is over saturated in the game now. It used to be unique to have and only a few champions had it and the had trade offs for having True Damage but now everyone has it.

It has increased in how prevalent it is, yes. I still attribute this to Riot having a better idea of what it adds to a kit though.

Frosted Tips1 votes

The buff was actually made specifically because AP-heavy team comps were struggling to take towers compared to AD-heavy team comps.

If you believe that from your experience fine, but I never saw that towers had tons of changes done to them during that time frame and once they got all settled AP was hitting too hard IMO and Riot was just like let's add 10% more damage. I believe Riot was wrong and still is wrong for doing this.

Urgot, Kled, Pantheon, Camille, Rengar, Riven, Illaoi, Renekton, Jayce, Olaf, Gnar, and Aatrox all currently use it in their most frequent AND their highest win-rate builds. Other champions can opt into it when they don't take Conqueror. It's still very commonly used, basically -- just not ubiquitous.

I have not seen a Camille ever take this that would be beyond weird to see. Trinity is a million times better on her just like it is on Fiora. Urgot, Gnar, and Jayce wow it is now almost specific to champions that are ranged harassers wow I'm glad that is the case. Rengar only builds that if he is laning which most people don't. Riven is in a bad spot right now and only takes it because she legit has no other options besides building full leathality which is a huge itemization problem. Wait sense when does Olaf build that he hasn't in months. Pantheon needs a rework and shouldn't even be considered as a statistic until it happens. So that leaves Renekton, Riven, and Kled as the only 3 champions that get the full use out of Black Cleaver.

It has increased in how prevalent it is, yes. I still attribute this to Riot having a better idea of what it adds to a kit though.

My problem is that they are adding it to things other than just champion kits. That would be fine I just don't agree with it being on items.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}I have not seen a Camille ever take this that would be beyond weird to see.

Here you go.

Wait sense when does Olaf build that he hasn't in months.

Here you go.

Basically, you're taking a design fact (Black Cleaver is less common now that Conqueror exists) and applying personal beliefs to it (these champions don't count, and if it isn't core on the people it used to all the time then it's worthless now). The former is true, the latter is not. Black Cleaver is still a viable pick -- especially with other Keystones -- and is still core on several characters.

Frosted Tips1 votes

I don't get what your point is they don't build the item so I don't know what you are trying to prove.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

I don't get what your point is they don't build the item so I don't know what you are trying to prove.

Those links show the highest win percentage and most common builds of those champions for the current patch.

Camille's highest win-rate build includes Black Cleaver. Olaf's most frequent build includes Black Cleaver, and his highest win-rate build includes Black Cleaver. It still has a place in their picks -- it's just something you tech into vs. certain enemies and compositions rather than something you always buy.

Frosted Tips1 votes

Both of those show under 200 games that is not even close to a large enough data pool. And those winrate on Olaf were sub 40% so it is awful which proves my point more.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by Frosted Tips

Riot Has Proven Time and Timd Again They Have No Clue How to Balance the Jungle
Gameplay62 comments
86
votes
Can't Wait to Have to Ban Mundo Every Game Next Patch
Gameplay100 comments
67
votes
The Day Has Finally Come
Gameplay88 comments
61
votes
Why Does Riot Buff Champions that Need Reworks
Gameplay74 comments
57
votes
Font of Life is Still Underpowered
Gameplay28 comments
48
votes
What Happened to the RoA Changes?
Gameplay42 comments
47
votes