The Principle of Least Disruption & Riot's Balance Changes

ofart··48 votes·28,167 views

I don't think Riot understands this concept so I'll explain it in the context of the latest Devourer nerf (increase in time to acquire Sated and decrease in the final damage provided).

Let's say that Yi and Shyvana are a balance issue since they have the best synergy with Sated and the most success in ranked. Given the state of competitive play, this may not really be objectively true but suppose it is. Shyvana and Yi are now pretty much exclusively junglers so we're not considering the effect on other roles. You can nerf the champions or you can nerf the items.

If you nerf the champions, the scope of disruption is minimal and limited to two champions. Alternatively, you can nerf the core item, Devourer or other possibly problematic items. Some suggest that Rageblade should be nerfed to address these junglers and in principle this makes sense. Ideally, you want to nerf more specific items deeper in the tree rather than very general ones since that typically creates less disruption. However, Rageblade isn't actually core on either Yi or Shyvana. If you look at Masters+ players on the Korean ladder, you'll find many Yis and Shyvanas opting for BoRK or TH without ever buying Rageblade. Thus, if Riot wants to nerf an item to address them, it probably would have to be Devourer.

Unfortunately by nerfing Devourer, you create far more disruption than just nerfing the champions because that affects ALL junglers who may opt. for that route. This includes possibly abuse cases like Shyvana and Yi but also dozens of others like Kench, Nocturne, WW, Vi, Volibear, Ekko, Aatrox, Kindred, Kayle who aren't even an issue right now. In fact, for many of these, such as Volibear, Vi or Ekko, Devourer isn't the best choice anyway. However, nerfing the item reduces the cases where it's situationally strong or at least viable and lowers the diversity of Devourer junglers in general. For example, Devourer Vi may not be ideal but it is excellent vs tanks and so it may be a decent choice vs tanky teams with weak early games. Nocturne (especially in high ELO), tends to go Warrior but if your lanes are early game oriented and won't need help, you may prefer to pack a bit of a stronger punch late game. After the proposed Devourer nerfs, taking Devourer situational becomes a thing of the past. It simply won't be worth it except on the best users of the item. In effect, all it does is polarize the viability of Devourer junglers even more towards Yi and Shyvana while leaving currently mediocre Devourer junglers like Nocturne or Aatrox completely in the dust. It creates a lot of disruption for many junglers and in effect reduces both build diversity as well as jungle diversity to avoid touching the kits of two junglers.

This doesn't seem like the right way to handle things at all even if Riot actually believes there's a problem with some Devourer junglers. The approach is akin to putting Pneumonia medicine in the water supply of an entire city instead of just providing it to those with the disease. If you don't like that analogy, consider if someone poisoned the water supply of an entire city to kill rats in the sewage system.

97 Comments

RiotMeddler38 votes

We're nerfing Devourer because we believe Devourer itself is a problem. It's intended to be a mid game power spike that at present is coming online too quickly and contributing a bit much before it's sated. As a result we're both making it a bit harder to stack and reducing its power when not sated. While Devourer itself hasn't been changed recently players have got significantly better at optimizing collection of stacks, those from Scuttle/Dragon/Rift Herald in particular. We did look at whether we should reduce the number of stacks those monsters granted. We felt strongly though that pulling Devourer junglers into more contested objectives was really valuable though, as a way to offset the low interaction PVE play that farming junglers engage in.

Longer term I suspect we may end up making heavier modifications to Devourer too sometime this season. It does some cool things, but the play patterns it promotes and some of the power spikes it creates have been costly to the game at times. It's also an approach that can be extremely dominant in low level play without being functional at all in top tier play.

As to the principle of least disruption, certainly, that's a great one to consider. Do need to be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms rather than causes though, sometimes bigger systemic changes are needed.

TheSingularity5 votes

Devourer ain't the issue, its the synergy it has with guinsoo+it's absurd synergy with yi's passive, potentially quadra hitting people

sWeixin VinLeous3 votes

{quoted}

We're nerfing Devourer because we believe Devourer itself is a problem. It's intended to be a mid game power spike that at present is coming online too quickly and contributing a bit much before it's sated. As a result we're both making it a bit harder to stack and reducing its power when not sated. While Devourer itself hasn't been changed recently players have got significantly better at optimizing collection of stacks, those from Scuttle/Dragon/Rift Herald in particular. We did look at whether we should reduce the number of stacks those monsters granted. We felt strongly though that pulling Devourer junglers into more contested objectives was really valuable though, as a way to offset the low interaction PVE play that farming junglers engage in.

Longer term I suspect we may end up making heavier modifications to Devourer too sometime this season. It does some cool things, but the play patterns it promotes and some of the power spikes it creates have been costly to the game at times. It's also an approach that can be extremely dominant in low level play without being functional at all in top tier play.

As to the principle of least disruption, certainly, that's a great one to consider. Do need to be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms rather than causes though, sometimes bigger systemic changes are needed.

any plans for warrior or reworking cinderhulk?

IEatCrayÖns4 votes

Uhmm maybe the reason why Devourer JG is getting so much spike mid game is because of Rageblade. We didnt seem to have a massive Devourer problem last season when the next item on the list was BOTRK, due to its cost and effectiveness early game while Rageblade can be stacked in 3 seconds nowadays because the champs that do get it has attack speed modifiers.

CrazedPorcupine5 votes

Have you thought about removing the concept of a "Farming" jungle item at all and simply adding in a "Wits end" type jungle item instead? Have it build from item 1033 and item 1043?

Elladril18 votes

[deleted]

shyv7 votes

i feel like these changes are just going to make people hate devourer junglers even more because i will literally not do a single fucking thing before im sated unless they're at our nexus turrets. even then i'd probably go get drag.

Pika3106 votes

So basically you're saying we the players were right when we told you all of this months ago, but you arrogantly refused to admit it and are only just now finally nerfing Devourer when you should've done so when we said it was OP a long time ago?

Color me not surprised.

Wipoulou4 votes

i think the problem is not that devourer is op but more that the item itself is problematic. It's either too weak because coming online too late, or too strong. IMO it was more balanceable when it could stack to infinite and killing people gave 2 stacks, now ganking doesn't feel rewarding and player have this mindset of "I need to get sated ASAP" and they stay in the jungle half the game, whereas jungler used to try and gank with 10 stacks because there wasn't a definite power spike.

PiVoRx6 votes

So we really nerfing a item that nobody gives a fuck in competitive play? Makes sense.. even more that we didnt see a single devourer jungler/item whole seasson yet in LCS.

Bônes1 votes

They can't just balance for LCS and say fuck you to everyone below Challengers. That's retarded. There have been times where champions have been very strong in SoloQ (like Katarina a while ago) but not played in LCS. Does that mean that Riot shouldn't nerf them?

PiVoRx1 votes

That means people who complain about soloq champions useless in lcs should just l2p. I used to complain about Katarina too, but when i learned how to counter her now shes like meh..

Bônes1 votes

If it was so easy to l2p (for everyone), people wouldn't stay in bronze after thousands of games. Riot, as a business, has to consider everyone, including the bronzies and silvers, especially since they are around 70% of the playerbase. They may not l2p but the game has to be fun for them as well, otherwise they will leave. That said, Riot tends to take all skill levels into consideration probably leaning more towards high elo.

Also, Katarina wasn't strong in SoloQ only because people need to "l2p" but also because there is much less coordination on SoloQ and people aren't using voice comms. Katarina wasn't picked in the LCS because teams can easily coordinate to shut down the Katarina. There are other things to consider in LCS that can cause champions to be weaker or stronger in LCS than in SoloQ. Even Udyr, as strong as he is/was, was rarely picked the past few weeks and was not that successful.

TheAceInShades7 votes

so we getting ww buffs since you nerfed him with the original devourer, never fixed him, changed devourer which didn't help him at all, and now you are nerfing that one.

WW actually got viable for that brief moment of the original devourer.

League of Wheels3 votes

I would heavily disagree. He sits at a very fair 51.3 win rate right now and is 11th highest win rate, almost all the Junglers above either also benefitting from devourer or are niche (i.e. shaco).

WIthout a stat to back it up, i would also bet that WW's viability is greater in lower elos such as silver and sees higher win rates there. I think he is in a very very fair position now, and will proportionally be brought down as all the top tier devourer jungles are also brought down.

That one moment you speak of where 'ww was viabale for a brief moment' i in particular remember him being tweaked too high and seeing a very high play rate with simaltaniously high win rate leading towards the conclusion that he was slightly op.

Mobius4 votes

{quoted}

We're nerfing Devourer because we believe Devourer itself is a problem. It's intended to be a mid game power spike that at present is coming online too quickly and contributing a bit much before it's sated. As a result we're both making it a bit harder to stack and reducing its power when not sated. While Devourer itself hasn't been changed recently players have got significantly better at optimizing collection of stacks, those from Scuttle/Dragon/Rift Herald in particular. We did look at whether we should reduce the number of stacks those monsters granted. We felt strongly though that pulling Devourer junglers into more contested objectives was really valuable though, as a way to offset the low interaction PVE play that farming junglers engage in.

Longer term I suspect we may end up making heavier modifications to Devourer too sometime this season. It does some cool things, but the play patterns it promotes and some of the power spikes it creates have been costly to the game at times. It's also an approach that can be extremely dominant in low level play without being functional at all in top tier play.

As to the principle of least disruption, certainly, that's a great one to consider. Do need to be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms rather than causes though, sometimes bigger systemic changes are needed.

So what am I supposed to do when an early jungler like Nidalee/Lee Sin/Shaco/Elise shits all over my team before 10 min before I can't do anything? What's the point of playing a Devourer jungler when a standard Warrior/Runic's Echo jungler has a much safer and effective playstyle? Devourer can backfire pretty hard if your team is behind, the other 2 don't, since they don't really on "stacks" to be strong and their jungle item is much stronger than ours until we get Sated and that's exactly why Devourer is not popular in competitive. As a Devourer jungler I have to do the same job as everyone else, plus I have to manage stacks and now I'm getting punished for it? Why? What exactly is overpowered about Devourer jungling atm? Yi doing too much damage in a tank build? Also, the amount of stacks you get is influenced by your team performance, for example you can't contest drag when your botlane is getting destroyed. This jungling style has clear pros and cons, but I'm not gonna wait few patches for you to fix this, I'm just gonna jump on the Warrior/RE junglers train and have an easier time winning games.

Cronovey7 votes

The problem I have with this is that you're nerfing the item when there is clear counterplay to the item; contest objectives like Dragon/Herald and the rift scuttlers. There is a clear counterplay that should be attempted just based on the game in general to begin with, so why nerf the item when it's actually just poor play on the opposing team's part that is making them so powerful?

It's like letting a Nasus stack 300 Q stacks before attempting to gank him; it's silly and anyone with general knowledge of the game knows that you want to keep Nasus down as hard as possible, especially in the early game where he's vulnerable. But I don't see Nasus only getting 2 stacks for his Q instead of 3, or increased cooldown on his Q to prevent the stacking in the early game, while Devourer junglers are already restricted by the respawn timers on jungle camps and vision to begin with.

You're punishing the player doing the right thing and not changing or addressing the fact that the other team is failing to counter the strategy being used in the game, which seems somewhat wrong.

ReptileVx1 votes

I respectively disagree with that statement. There is no "clear counterplay to the item", at least not in solo queue. Admittedly, in 5 v 5 premade teams, you have more objective control, more map control, more everything and you can contest objectives a lot easier. In solo queue, however, you stay in your lane and prey that you have a competent jungler that will be a lot strong than the enemy jungler and will deny him his stacks by counter jungling him non stop.

Well, if we take Shyvana as an example. She has a 50%+ winrate against every jungler so I'm not sure who can kill her 1 v 1 early on (maybe a shaco with ignite). Regardless, that's not how the game is supposed to play. When you have a devourer jungle, the entire game boils down to him becoming sated. Even if he ganks 0 lanes pre mid game, once sated he can solo change the course of a game since every gank from then on will result in kills. If he ganks on top of that pre mid game and gets some kills he'll sate even faster and the game will end in a FF at 20.

Compete with drake and herald you say? Imagine a lvl 5 devourer jungler ganks bot lane and pushes them out of the lane. There you go, free 5 stacks. As for Herald, in solo queue Herald is sometimes even easier to get than Drake. Just force top laner out and take it. ps: Shyvana can solo drake at 6. Prey your jungler wards drake early on.

Devourer has made games very very stressful and fully dependent on the jungler stacking devourer. If you have one, you know you'll win if he has good jungle paths. If both teams have one, again it'll boil down to the jungler with the most efficient clears. Junglers are not supposed to 3 hit ko top laners that fully counter them (once sated) and are supposed to be around 2 lvls ahead of 'em. And yet, we now have sated tank junglers that deal so much dmg and are yet impossible to kill before late game. During teamfights who do you focus? A sated Shyvana that can one shot your squishies but needs 5 ppl to take down or do you ignore her and go for the ad carrier thus getting destroyed by one single tank jungler.

Games are awful. If i had 10 bans, I'd ban all 10 devourer junglers every game so we can have a normal game. It's like having a Nasus with 700 stacks at 15 min every game (would you like it if a Nasus had an item that made it possible for him to get 700 stacks within 15 min?)

The Hubster2 votes

Why not just nerf rageblade? The item is clearly a problem right now. Devourer was fine before the rageblade buff preseason, now it's a must have item on a lot of champions, including ADC's. Do you guys not play the game that much, or do you just look at some of the feedback? I'm sorry, but devourer is NOT the problem, rageblade is. You say it comes online "too quickly" but it usually takes 20 minutes to get it fully stacked if the jungler is actually ganking. That's probably 2/3 of the total game time. How is that too quickly?

Javazon1 votes

How is rageblade a clear issue when all the toptier toplane champions don't put it in their build. Toptier being trundle, rammus, fiora, nautalus, poppy, gangplank and malphite. This is what high elo use this is what competitive is playing because they're the best toplaners.

Then the only adc buying this item is kogmaw. And rageblade isn't in yi's meta build or really any toptier junglers build. Yi not even being toptier jungler.

Over-all this was a rhetorical question. I actually just wanted to say I disagree with you, and that you're wrong. But I do agree with you saying "You say it comes online "too quickly" but it usually takes 20 minutes to get it fully stacked if the jungler is actually ganking. That's probably 2/3 of the total game time. How is that too quickly?" Cheers.

The Hubster1 votes

"top tier"? You mean in plat+? Champion.gg much? Those are horribly skewed statistics. Rammus isn't a top tier top laner. Rageblade is being built on Xin, Jax, Yi, Kog, Irelia, Shyvana, (any devourer jungler) and several top laners below platinum. You can't look at champion.gg and say there is no problem with the item. That's like looking at a group of graduate math students and saying that math isn't hard because there are people doing it at a high level. Don't put so much stock in skewed stats.

Javazon1 votes

So you point is plat and bellow it's a good item so it should be nerfed? Lol ok noted and disregarded. Also champion.gg is irrelevant I don't look at it no one who's good at the game does. Pro's don't care about it, they don't decide what they're going to play in their next lcs match off it. Riot regularly disowns it too saying it's misleading often. Also yes rammus is toptier. It's freelo against ad heavy comps. All champions I listed are toptier and you have no viable counter argument except the champion.gg non-point. And like I said noone but low elo cares if yi or shyvana or whatever are taking rageblade because the meta has shifted to devour titanic hydra because it's better than rageblade. Irelia ghostblade rush is better and.... I dunno why I'm even bothering you won't understand.

ReptileVx1 votes

Shyvana and Udyr dont build Rageblade and are or were sitting at the highest winrate in solo Q.

Irelia Bot2 votes

So basically the goal is to make it a little stronger early to mid game but not have the power spike and still scale to some degree into late game?

Why not remove the phantom attack since that seems to be the issue and then buff everything else a little.

Just an example

35 on hit magic damage 35% attack speed Unique passive: this item can get up to 50 stacks (1 stack from large jungle monsters, 2 from kills/assists, 5 from baron/dragon, 4 from turret kills/assists) Every 2 stacks gives 1% attack speed and one more on hit magic damage.

Assuming that the phantom attack is the real problem thsi would help with it a lot.

Max of 60 on hit magic damage and 60% attack speed. That is a within reason amount of power for a item late game given the overall cost. If it needs something else make it do 33% more on hit magic damage to neutral monsters at all points of the game and numbers can be adjusted.

clement12131 votes

The phantom attack is vital to Shyvana MasterYi XinZhao . If you remove it, they become useless.

Irelia Bot1 votes

{quoted}

The phantom attack is vital to Shyvana MasterYi XinZhao . If you remove it, they become useless.

If they become useless after the phantom attack is gone then buff them.

Sir Yamazuki1 votes

{quoted}

The phantom attack is vital to Shyvana MasterYi XinZhao . If you remove it, they become useless.

It actually isn't. That part of devour wasn't there initially and they were all fine before it was even added.

InHaruhiWeTrust2 votes

"We felt strongly though that pulling Devourer junglers into more contested objectives was really valuable though, as a way to offset the low interaction PVE play that farming junglers engage in.

Longer term I suspect we may end up making heavier modifications to Devourer too sometime this season. It does some cool things, but the play patterns it promotes and some of the power spikes it creates have been costly to the game at times. It's also an approach that can be extremely dominant in low level play without being functional at all in top tier play."

what do you think about Nasus then? his infinite stacking Q promotes a playstyle far more toxic than devour. devour is also something that you can opt out of by getting another enchantment. devour also doesn't effect an enemy player nearly as much, since you have options like invading, trying to out farm or ganking and snowballing lanes. with nasus you really only have one option and that is to pretty much stop playing league of legends and become "the nasus baby sitter". i'm not saying he's OP just that his play style is toxic and does what you accuse devour of doing to a far greater degree.

ThreshMySoul1 votes

Just a thought, but perhaps if a big worry of Devourer is that it encourages PvE interactions, why not encourage players to counter-jungle by increasing the stacks earned in the other side's camps? Players who are going for a Devourer item would then have to correctly assess where their opponents are on the map and where they might be in the fog of war if they wanted to farm faster, and could get punished if they attempt an invade incorrectly. Also, not every jungler can counter-jungle based on their kit, and would help to prevent item abuse across non-Devourer based champions.

I guess then, would the problem become, "I MUST counter-jungle" instead of considering it as a situationual option? Or perhaps would it be a problem of that your own camps (or neutral objectives) don't matter as much as the enemies and could lead to focus on pure denial of the enemy jungler's ability to both farm and have fun?

ReptileVx1 votes

Then you just pick a strong devourer early game jungler and destroy the enemy jungler. Let's say, you pick a Shyvana and basta. You can kill any jungler early game. Maybe add an smite/ignite, then you'll end the game solo at 15 min. The game would be 100% boiled down to junglers. No need for laning phase anymore. Whatever jungler dominates the jungle early will finish the game without ever having to gank a lane.

The Die Is Cast1 votes

{quoted}

We're nerfing Devourer because we believe Devourer itself is a problem. It's intended to be a mid game power spike that at present is coming online too quickly and contributing a bit much before it's sated. As a result we're both making it a bit harder to stack and reducing its power when not sated. While Devourer itself hasn't been changed recently players have got significantly better at optimizing collection of stacks, those from Scuttle/Dragon/Rift Herald in particular. We did look at whether we should reduce the number of stacks those monsters granted. We felt strongly though that pulling Devourer junglers into more contested objectives was really valuable though, as a way to offset the low interaction PVE play that farming junglers engage in.

Longer term I suspect we may end up making heavier modifications to Devourer too sometime this season. It does some cool things, but the play patterns it promotes and some of the power spikes it creates have been costly to the game at times. It's also an approach that can be extremely dominant in low level play without being functional at all in top tier play.

As to the principle of least disruption, certainly, that's a great one to consider. Do need to be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms rather than causes though, sometimes bigger systemic changes are needed.

What are your thoughts on Shyvana.

Currently she has one of the lowest top lane win rates. She is completely make or break depending on the state of devourer.

Not only that but she is forced to build it and spend her game farming for it. This removes player choice from Shyvana mains forcing them into that farm based playstyle with no other options because she is nerfed to compensate for devourer being so strong on her.

IMO this is such bad game design and is why I refuse to play Shyvana despite her being one of my favourite champions.

I recall someone mention her as a candidate for a juggernaught update?

Bônes2 votes

With games ending quicker this season, it's already been questionable to build devourer. Now with this nerf, in most games the match will already be decided by the time the jungler gets sated, if he ever does.

Kahgro2 votes

With games already ending at 20 minutes it seems you just want to nerf it into the ground until you guys eventually decide to remove it like Feral Flare.

MrWasjig1 votes

Do need to be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms rather than causes though,

Funny you should mention that, given Riot frequently does it.

Dediguise1 votes

Hey Meddler, Have you guys considered making scuttle crabs worth 3 stacks in light of this development? It would making contesting them even more important and it would create more potential for skirmishes in neutral territory. It would also force devourer junglers to make a choice between gold/xp or quicker stacks instead of just acting like a farm bot for 15 min.

clement12131 votes

I think the main problem is guinsoo, not devourer. Guinsoo should be nerfed instead. 8% AS per stack is too much. It is better to nerf it to 5% per stack I think. (40% AS at 8 stacks is more balanced, 64% is too op)

It takes a long time to get sated if your opponents know how to counter jungle. When the devourer is sated, it may be already 20-25 mins game time, and the average length of game is about 25-30 mins.

It takes a lot of risks to play a devourer jungler, your ganks are so weak in early game, and you need to spend a lot of time to farm, that means your ally are in a 4vs5 situation for 20-25 mins. Your opponents may have already been fed by your ally because you don't help them in early game. And you can't carry the game even you have a sated devourer now. It is too late. (That's why no LCS player build devourer)

I know many people complain that sated devourer is op. However; If it is not so powerful in late game, no one will take this risk.

I suggest to change devourer like this :

Suggestion 1: 40% AS 20 on hit magic damage need 40 stacks to become sated +1 on hit magic damage per stack kill/assist gains 2 stacks (so that jungler will go ganking, not just farming) Farming monsters gain the same no. of stacks as current version Sated devourer is exactly the same as current version

Suggestion 2: 40% AS 30 on hit magic damage need 30 stacks to become sated +1 on hit magic damage per stack gain 1 stack every 30 seconds (so it takes 15 mins to get sated) (similar to Rod of Ages) Gain no stacks by farming monsters kill/assist still gains 1 stack (get sated faster if go ganking) Sated devourer is exactly the same as current version

This can encourage devourer jungler to go ganking, not just farming and be a useless jungler.

By the way, has master yi's alpha strike bug been fixed? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LimM9a2ajE4

Dealth6 votes

Every traditional devourer jungler (or most of them) are above a 50% win rate right now, while other junglers who do not go devourer are suffering greatly. This is a good nerf to bring back the balance of the jungle.

Baron of Bread4 votes

It's entirely possible that they believe Sated Devourer is often being acquired too early in the game.

LaughingStapler2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Baron of Bread,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7o35rqgK,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2016-02-28T23:02:49.061+0000)

It's entirely possible that they believe Sated Devourer is often being acquired too early in the game.

Actually, it's exactly because of the time needed to acquire it that it hasn't been viable in competitive. But even if that were the case, why nerf its completed damage output on top of it?

Baron of Bread1 votes

There don't seem to be any changes to Sated, just the base item.

SnazzyTheMister1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Baron of Bread,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7o35rqgK,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2016-02-29T01:56:13.423+0000)

There don't seem to be any changes to Sated, just the base item.

nice catch. the damage wasn't lowered it was just moved. currently just buying devour is about 120% gold efficient without stacks and it only goes up from there. this changes seems to be aimed at pushing some of that efficiency into stating your devour.

LaughingStapler2 votes

Yeah, it's not as bad as I first thought either. However, don't look at just gold efficiency treating the on-hit like physical damage. Reality doesn't work that way and most champions that get it have AD scalings too.

PiVoRx3 votes

Its either aqquierd early or not at all. Game is so fast now, so its either your or enemy side stomped, if yours, and you lose control of your jungle, devourer jungler is done.

Dengeden3 votes

That's the thing, it's almost universally agreed in high elo that devourer is a bad item. When would the game be in a situation where you with certainty say "hm, I think I can secure 1-2 dragons/herald, every scuttle crab and full clear the jungle for 10 minutes straight before my team needs me in fights"?

thumbnail92 votes

Low tiers should just bite the bullet on this one.

Grashnim1 votes

Who is your main?

HayRoss13 votes

Ao shin

Grashnim1 votes

{quoted}

Ao shin

Main account. The one they are posting on hasn't played since like September, was it? I always like to see why people have such a vested interest in certain changes.

HayRoss3 votes

I still think it's Ao shin

More from Gameplay

More by ofart