Can you get rid of this first blood tower BS yet? Nobody cares that lane swaps make competitive boring when first blood tower is ruining the game. Competitive can go rot idgaf. Get this garbage out of here
Arya Riven40 votesCompetitive will always be boring anyway, except to the kinds of people who track sports stars personal lives, etc.
Because competitive will always just be the currently most effective strategy reiterated over and over and over.
Plus making the game miserable for millions of customers to make a few top tier people happy is the worst business ideal.
Ahristocats28 votesi never follow lcs
yet i can't miss a game of dota2 major especially when there is an elemination mode preventing pros to pick/ban 2 times the same champ in a row
MrWasjig7 votesThe major difference also being that Dota2 has a radically different balance and design philosophy to LoL. Because that game only balances around a single level of play, the best. Instead of LoL that tries to balance around every level of play, ultimately leading to nobody being satisfied.
Dota's attitude is "Git gud!" and that's by far the better attitude whereas with LoL if you whine constantly enough you can nerf anything. (except Lee Sin lololol)
Ahristocats3 votesYes, but i wanted to point out the elimination mode that i don't understand why league still doesn't have it
it simply improves pro play by a billion time
MrWasjig1 votesAnd I just wanted to point out the design philosophy that I don't understand why League still doesn't have it.
But yes, it would improve pro play. Not like it would get me to watch it since it's about as engaging was watching televised snooker, that is to say, as engaging as watching paint dry. But at least with watching paint dry you have something to look forward to when it's finished.
Ahristocats4 votesbecause meddler wants to please every elo if bronze players tell him to nerf yasuo he does it despite yasuo performing at 49% win rate in high elo and he's going to olaf him and make him disappear in high elo
naturally, we diamond 1 players have to get trash at the game to get a good balance, low elo shouldn't get good at the game to get a good balance part of the reason i need a smurf to play Sona
ModCaptainMårvelous6 votes*Because Riot wants to please every ELO.
DOTA doesn't have nearly the casual playerbase that league has nor cares about them as much. (Even though 7.0 obviously makes a stride to please casuals with a more league-like UI, overall clean-ups and more flavor changes than raw balance changes) I also think it's funny that you say "Low ELO shouldn't get good to get good balance" because of a statistic like this was brought-up int he DOTA community, you'd be told to get good.
Majors are interesting because IF and co. balance 99% of the time around pro play and things trickle down. Riot, comparatively, tries to 50/50 it to appeal casuals. I can assure you that if Riot completely balanced around pro play, the meta would be extremely diverse....but it'd almost mean we'd have 60%+ win rate Garen stomping every Bronze-to-gold game because nobody knows what to do against him.
DOTA tells you to get good. League tries to make you feel good.
Ahristocats1 votesbut it'd almost mean we'd have 60%+ win rate Garen stomping every Bronze-to-gold game because nobody knows what to do against him.
why exactly should i care? i prefer this than being forced to go into low elo to play some champions
i'm sure garen mains in d1 feel the same
NichtHurz5 votesWell, there also is one major problem with League's design compared to Dota's. Abilities scaling with AD, AP and other stats. This leads to very problematic relations between certain champs and items. This leads to huge problems when item balance is changed, leading to several champs being screwed over or others suddenly being broken. Then again you'll change champion balance and suddenly certain items become problematic and need to be nerfed.
Besides the different design philosophy I feel like this makes League balance more problematic. In Dota you have a few more options to change their hero balance. For example: If the Dota balance team feels like a certain ranged champ is too good at kiting and never letting melee heros participate, they could just adjust the character's turn speed and they might already have balanced the hero. The lack of AP and AD scaling also makes it easier to finetune hero abilities without having to fear an item change destroying the whole hero's stat balance.
Ahristocats4 votescomparing dota and league is not a good thing, of course they're different
the point of this discussion is that icefrog (there is no balance team in dota) balances the game around pro players only, only and only pro players he looks at what happens at majors/high competition events and see the stats not only win rate alone but pick rate Mirana had for example on 100 games 86% pick rate and 56% win rate at ti, this clearly means that she's broken because on a very high sample her win rate goes to 56% instead of 50% then when this is done, he goes and see the gameplay in the pro scene, and proced to do a balance change either increasing the strength of a hero to buff, or increase the counterplay to a hero to nerf (never the opposite) the balance of the game is done around pro players for the sake of competition but also for the same of balance
if you balance the game around low elo AND at the same time high elo, you will never achieve a perfect balanced game
looking at dota2 pro scene+last patch (7.01) dota is almost perfectly balanced, as in 7.01 there was like a league level of patch instead of a normal patch (all heroes changed)
league's balance team does so much different works and say so many different things i don't understand them. 2 years ago meddler said that they wanted to nerf riven without nerfing her core strength, then in the same patch he literally gutted the shit out of kassadin's strength
ModCaptainMårvelous4 votesThat's exactly what I'm arguing for. :P
I'm firmly of the belief Riot should only balance around Diamond and above. I'm shitty at the game but I'd rather have a game balanced for people who are GOOD at it than trying to justify why my gold five ass needs Riot to give me training wheels so I too can be a sick nasty pro.
Of course, this sentiment is rare. People on the boards vastly prefer Riot to balance around Bronze-to-gold games.
Arya Riven3 votesWhile I agree in general. Garen's current kit, along with some other point and click stat checks, cannot be balanced for the current pro scene. These generic stat check champions would have to be buffed to insane numbers to be viable. And then would become more reliable and thus too strong. This happened with Shyvana, Udyr and Olaf before.
Elikain6 votesExcept when someone tells you to "git good", you get mad, come here to complain how:
You know, the usual. Because when a going gets tough in League, your first thought isn't that you're getting rekt because you're worse than the other player, that you need to "git good" first and then enjoy the higher ELO. Your first thought is that it's Riot's fault somewhere, that the balance of the other champion is heavily in favor of the player, not the opponent, it's the matchmaker, Autofill, that damn Yasuo ban that didn't allow you to play him so you lost because your a teammate intentionally wanted you to lose, Dynamic Queue, a premade...
Essentially, all excuses to not "git good". What's stopping Riot from balancing on that level? "It's not me, it's you" attitude. The crybaby community who can't take a single "git good" change, work its shaft for a while and then get to call themselves decent players. Because all of you are secretly suppressed Challenger players in disguise who never get the spotlight and are where you are because Riot intentionally keeps you there. It's never that perfect time where you can instantly become that Challenger you wanted to be, because the wind was blowing on the other side of your face, on that day.
WoonStruck14 votesThis is a farce. Competitive will be boring because Riot doesn't know how to design a competitive game.
Untrue. Look at other MOBAs. League is basically alone in that regard. Again, boils down to garbage design.
Untrue. Look at other MOBAs. League is basically alone in that regard. Again, boils down to garbage design. And a garbage balance team.
Arya Riven6 votesLooking at other mobas. They are unpopular, unappealing, low profit and slow paced.
Best princess EU15 votesthis is by far the most ignorant post i ever saw
basically here is how we should think "we only play league, therefore other mobas are unpopular"
LUL
Elikain11 votesLet me just give you a downvote because your post is just... Let me explain why:
Now, that's a load of BS right here. Any stats you'd like to share that support your statement or is this strictly your own opinion? Because if that's your opinion, label it as such. Why are so many people watching League's competitive scene and copying strats from them if it's boring and uninteresting? "Masses enjoy something that they don't enjoy" is your argument?
Have you watched Heroes of the Storm pro scene? That game, even though i sank a lot of hours into it because it's honestly so damn fun to play, **is utterly boring to watch. ** The reason why there are so many maps there (and therefore different map objectives) is because there's literally nothing going around in that game. The game can be incredibly in depth because of the whole Hero Tallents system but only from an individual's point of view. Looking at the entire picture, from a spectator's point of view, games are incredibly short (around 10-20 minutes) where there're constant 5v5s going around the map. There's nothing else to be seen.
And i bet your ass does know how to do that properly. You're essentially giving the impression like you're sitting on the goldmine, on that very idea that's going to be such a hit that it's going to make you filthy rich and allow you to establish your own company, to give players what they've truly needed all their lives. But you're lying in wait for Riot to fall first. The only problem being is that you only appear here to talk down the changes, never actually discussing them. You're here only to fulfill your "shit talk" quota of the day, it seems.
That's how i understood your rebuttal to the Arya Riven's comment. At first i thought he was insinuating that, until i saw that you just reused the same reply from your previous point. To this statement, i can only reply in one way:
Because when a going gets tough in League, your first thought isn't that you're getting rekt because you're worse than the other player, that you need to "git good" first and then enjoy the higher ELO. Your first thought is that it's Riot's fault somewhere, that the balance of the other champion is heavily in favor of the player, not the opponent, it's the matchmaker, Autofill, that damn Yasuo ban that didn't allow you to play him so you lost because your a teammate intentionally wanted you to lose, Dynamic Queue, a premade...
Essentially, all excuses to not "git good". What's stopping Riot from balancing on that level? "It's not me, it's you" attitude. The crybabies who can't take a single "git good" change, work its shaft for a while and then get to call themselves decent players.
You're all Challengers. You all know a lot better than them and know how to properly balance this game. You have known that for years and Riot never listened to you smart people. It's just that fucking Riot, man... They don't know how to PROPERLY balance the game for future Challengers...
First it started light... It was Lyte that was the problem or just a very small number of Rioters that chafed you the wrong way. But then the list kept getting longer and longer. At that point, one must ask himself if it is really hundreds of people that are the problem, or is it you?
The simplest solution is in most cases the correct one. It's you. But as i stated in my previous point, you have "it's not me, it's you" syndrome. It's always someone else at fault, never you. Your precious ego can't handle you ever being in the wrong.
SwaggyMcGhee42024 votesReminder that whoever got the first tower had a 70% winrate before the first blood was added.
Apollogy2 votesNot sure where these statistics are coming from... but...
RIP
SwaggyMcGhee4202 voteshttp://www.leagueofgraphs.com/infographics/patch-6-14-infographics
I think these stats are accurate but you can't be 100% sure.
Apollogy2 votesYeah, I saw someone else talking about that site after replying to yours, lol
Wasn't sure if it was true, all I knew... if it is true, then RIP, :p
(Also, if I get first blood from ganking, first drake because I ganked bot, and first tower because I ganked a tp-less/tp-down top lane...
I could probably win nearly every game. Unfortunately, statistics don't work in our favor like that. (You don't get a 70% win rate from first tower because it's first tower. You get a 70% win rate from first tower because your "team" got first tower). If that makes sense? Meaning, the tower itself isn't winning your game, it's the team/players that are making the decisions that lead to that first tower. It's not the decisions themselves, it's the combined process of your entire team and their ability vs that of the enemy team.
Part of that statistic could be the advantage that the first tower is giving you. It's actually pretty easy to see how little the actual objective matters towards winning when you consider that the massive first blood tower bonus that can lead to a pretty heavy snowball... only increased the win rate from first tower by 3%... (and we're not sure if that's why it's gone up by 3%, that 3% could be influenced by a lot of other factors in the game... but for argument's sake...) The actual effect that first blood tower might have on the game could be a 1% or 2% increase to your chances of winning, but because your team or a player on your team is making the right calls, and should continue to do so most of the time for the rest of the game... you'll continue to secure other advantages around the map, and that's why you end up winning 73% of the time with a first blood tower...
Idk if I can actually convey the idea on my mind in words right now, lmao...
But yeah, RIP, :p
(All that is just me thinking about stuff, league, and statistics... and why they're not showing us what they appear to be showing us most of the time). A champion with a 55% win rate could actually be weak in the meta. A champion with a 45% win rate could be strong in the meta. (Look at the win rates on players who actually play those champions, and they're usually higher. That'll give you a good idea if its' a viable pick or not). Although, if you're going to distrust what one statistic is telling you, why should you conversely trust an opposite one?
CancerBasedGod21 votesSo what percent is reasonable? 50%? Seems about right, you shouldn't be more likely to win just because you're winning... Oh wait... No you should. Essentially what you're telling us here is that the team that is ahead is more likely to win. Seems logical.
Supreme Senpai699 votesI mean, 60% or something would be cool... there are middle grounds here lol.
Reset2138 votesLol, people just upvote anything now.
You lost your lane, that isn't a balance issue.
Ahristocats1 votesit should definitly not be 70
because first inhib was 70% and was nerfed to the ground, in 2014 nearly riot removed the ability to get stronger minions on all 3 lanes by destroying an inhib
Quepha3 votes[{quoted}](name=Dr Sona x Rubick,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=A7X3B0ib,comment-id=000600010000,timestamp=2017-01-23T14:58:24.551+0000)
it should definitly not be 70
because first inhib was 70% and was nerfed to the ground, in 2014 nearly riot removed the ability to get stronger minions on all 3 lanes by destroying an inhib
First inhib is over 90% winrate right now.
Sinserta20 votesAgreed. Completely unneccesary. Add on the fact that everyone groups bot in order to take it...
IcyPepper19 votesThat is a very specific statistic, so I request a citation please?
DunkinNoobs118 votesThat is a very specific statistic, so I request a citation please?
First blood tower was implemented in 6.15. Current stats from LeagueofGraphs.com have the first tower team winning 72% of the time. How often did the first tower team win in 6.14, the patch before first tower gold was introduced? 70%.
Turns out it didn't really make much of a difference at all.
vOmvbrawfU39 votesPeople just look for a reason to bitch lol.
Mecha Incognito7 votesI was just about to say, it tends not to be about the gold the tower gives, but the fact that the winning team was taking towers in the first place instead of dicking around for a team deathmatch.
AMYS GRAVE6 votesA 2% winrate change would be considered a reasonably large buff to a champion.
Stillname17 votesThat is because a champion is only 1/5th of the champions on his team. Each champion should only responsible for 20% of the game influence under ideal circumstances so 2% increase is 10% better then they used to be.
This is why a champion with a 55% winrate feels very impactful and a 43% winrate feels like garbage.
This is not completely true because arguably a support may only have 15% influence over the game and a jungler may have 25% influence just as an example.
AtheosisX11 votesWasn't it like 67% before the change? Obviously it made things worse, but this game is all about snowballing even without the first tower gold.
Leetri9 votesWent from 70% to 72%, so it might as well be a placebo effect.
StoryDuck5 votesSo...not really a big difference. i can see why someone would be concerned about that number but it makes sense when you think about it.
NewGuy1016 votesBecause people want to blame something unrelated to themselves and declare it for why they are consistently losing/having problems instead of themselves. http://poorlydrawnlines.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/mad.png
JusticePauldrons11 votesWait doesn't this make complete sense? If you get the the first tower bonus you are likely doing well, it is just an additional snowball bonus.
Mechakaiser10 votesThe team that gets FB tower is usually the team with better players/coordination, or the team that values objectives more tham kills, in other words: The team that was probably going to win anyways. If you want to prove a real point you should consider the winrate of a team getting the first tower BEFORE tower FB, then compare It to the winrate of a team getting first tower AFTER tower FB.
Ahristocats3 votesyes yes
clearly that ziggs bot lane has some mechanics to be able to apply passive on tower constantly and get the first blood tower, and then having his win rate going to 54% which isn't broken at all
Tis a nice day10 votesReminder that whatever team gets first nexus has a 100% win rate.
Mostro Gallo6 votesReminder correlation does not equal causation.
Sire Hippington5 votesNobody cares that lane swaps make competitive boring
The thing is that tower FB isn't even need at all to prevent laneswaps. The Fortification changes are more than enough to make sure noone goes for a laneswap unless he's completely outpicked in standart lanes. With the current fortification, the team that initiates a laneswap needs TWICE as long to take the first tower, that's plenty of time for the enemy team to take a free drake, or push the inner tower or even try and defend their own tower.
The there is another imprtant fact: winrate of first tower was ~69-70% befor towerfirstblood already. The S6 vision and towergold changes are on of the main factors for snowballing. With how limited vision is since S6 mapcontroll from other sources like towers has become way more imprtant and impactfull, and the overall increase on towergold means they give your team a sigificant god advantage even without tower FB ontop of the mapcontroll.
6Sfool5 votesI'm fine with the first blood mechanic, as long as they double the health of every tower on the map. You should be sieging towers, not mowing them down.
Noblewind5 votesTotally agree. I mean, losing one fight at like 15 mins into the game shouldn't mean you also lose 2 towers from one 20 second push. That possibility and ease of taking objectives has always bothered me
WoonStruck2 votesThey could have just made a rule that stated "No lane swapping before 5 minutes" for competitive.
Would have accomplished the same thing without ruining the game.
ThugWalrus16 votesThat's a horrible idea. The worst thing you can do as a game designer is make arbitrary rules that prevent people from playing in the optimal way. Instead you motivate people to play healthier by changing the game itself (like the first tower blood).
It's the same reason when an item is problematic Riot doesn't prevent any one particular champion from buying it. When you start making patchwork rules to plug holes in your game, that's when you know you have failed as a designer. Sometimes these rules can accomplish the same thing, but sticking to a methodology is important so that 5 years down the line you don't have stuff like
MatthewRT24 votes" when an item is problematic Riot doesn't prevent any one particular champion from buying it. "
cough will of the ancientscough It was removed because only like one two champions used it as a core item and it was unhealthy on ONE of those champions
Mostro Gallo1 votesSports are filled with "arbitrary" rules, and Riot wants LoL to be a legitimate esport so badly...soooooooooooooooooooo....
Glory ln Death7 votesSports are filled with arbitrary rules because you can't code in incentive changes as easily as in a video game. You can't make big changes to the fields/courts easily, you can't nerf/buff the players, there aren't items to tweak, etc.
