Boards›Gameplay

What if kills were credited only if you survived?

Disulfiram··1 votes·856 views

I mean: you get a kill, then are still alive 10 seconds later -> you got a kill. You get a kill, but die for it -> the enemy was executed.

Why do I think this might be a good change?

  1. It would remove some incentive for greedy bad plays; for example, fewer people would dive 1v4 trying to get a kill unless they have a safe way out.

  2. It would make tower dives more risky: if getting killed after a successful dive meant that they didn't get a kill, then diving without a good advantage would set them back compared to the other lanes, and thus they would have to consider carefully whether diving you is worth it.

  3. Exchanging kills in lane wouldn't lead to snowballing: for example, if your Nasus top has been trading kills with the enemy Riven, you wouldn't get a Riven with 10 kills ganking bot for an easy double kill. You'd instead get ganked by a 0/10 Riven with low CS, which is far more manageable.

  4. This would be a buff to assassins, who would have a definite unique role in the team (as the class that can realistically dive in, get a kill on a weakened target, and get out alive) without the need of enough damage to 100->0 anyone instantly.

13 Comments

DuskDaUmbreon2 votes

Dives would just be strengthened, though.

A large number of kills in poor dives happen due to the diver dying to turret shots/ignite after killing the dived.

Changing this just means the diver would be executed and get the 300g from the kill at the cost of some CS.

Disulfiram1 votes

{quoted}

Dives would just be strengthened, though.

A large number of kills in poor dives happen due to the diver dying to turret shots/ignite after killing the dived.

Changing this just means the diver would be executed and get the 300g from the kill at the cost of some CS.

Uh no: if the diver dies then he doesn't get anything (he's not alive 10 seconds later), he just lost CS and gained nothing.

DuskDaUmbreon1 votes

...I think you misread what I said.

The process I described was dived champion dies to the diving champion, then the diving champion gets finished off by turret. Not diving champion dying first.

Disulfiram1 votes

{quoted}

...I think you misread what I said.

The process I described was dived champion dies to the diving champion, then the diving champion gets finished off by turret. Not diving champion dying first.

I understood perfectly, and I'll repeat what I wrote: if the new rule is "you don't get the kill if you're not alive 10 seconds afterwards", then neither the diver nor the dived get anything because they both died.

DuskDaUmbreon2 votes

Wait.

Not alive 10 seconds afterwards seems a tad bit extreme. It makes 9 death teamfights funnel 5 kills into one person for zero benefit for the other team.

It seems like a good idea in lane, sure, but just ultimately fucks over so much else.

Disulfiram1 votes

{quoted}

Wait.

Not alive 10 seconds afterwards seems a tad bit extreme. It makes 9 death teamfights funnel 5 kills into one person for zero benefit for the other team.

It seems like a good idea in lane, sure, but just ultimately fucks over so much else.

Good point... maybe, since one difference between a teamfight and laning are assists, it could be made to apply differently when many assists are involved?

Mordepool2 votes

This game already incentives cowardice enough as it is

geeklove1 votes

I see you don't like int sion Your idea is bad

Disulfiram1 votes

Not really, no: imho strategies that involve "inting" should not be encouraged. Anyway, if needed, there's no reason that champions who have revenge killing as part of their kits (KogMaw Sion Karthus ) couldn't follow a different rule, where kills gained with their passives are at least partially credited.

geeklove1 votes

One of the worst thing about this game is when some people don't like a particular strategy, they just complain, instead of learning to play against it. Like how this thread is a complaint against people who tower dive you or decide to go all in even though they know they're going to die.

Disulfiram1 votes

... I haven't complained nor brought up "inting strategies", you have. I don't even play on Summoner's Rift. The opening post was talking about greed, snowball, and assassins. Maybe next time you should try reading it before replying.

geeklove1 votes

{quoted}

... I haven't complained nor brought up "inting strategies", you have. I don't even play on Summoner's Rift. The opening post was talking about greed, snowball, and assassins. Maybe next time you should try reading it before replying.

I did read your original post. It talks about 1v4, Twisted Treeline is only 3v3.

You asked if your idea would be a good change. As already stated, no, it's a bad idea.

Your original post is a complaint, complaining about "greedy bad plays", "tower dives", "Riven with 10 kills ganking bot"

And as you already stated, you said you don't think that int Sion should be encouraged when there are Riot employees that have already stated it's a valid strat

Disulfiram1 votes

{quoted}

I did read your original post. It talks about 1v4, Twisted Treeline is only 3v3.

What does Twisted Treeline have to do with any of this? Are you trying to bring up random bits of whatever to justify your "no"?

Your original post is a complaint, complaining about "greedy bad plays", "tower dives", "Riven with 10 kills ganking bot"

Those were examples to illustrate the consequences that I think this change would have on the game.

And as you already stated, you said you don't think that int Sion should be encouraged when there are Riot employees that have already stated it's a valid strat

What does this have to do with this thread? I don't care about int Sion. I've never seen one. I wasn't even aware that it existed until you brought it up. I don't even know what it is, I only know that a strategy that involves getting killed on purpose (which, I'm assuming, is what "int" implies) seems very similar to the old Proxy Singed, which was promptly nerfed because it was too uninteractive.

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 Disulfiram

Why don't key fragments just auto-forge to keys?
Gameplay96 comments
271
votes
The hardest skillshot to land?
Gameplay252 comments
156
votes
That moment...
Memes & Games47 comments
99
votes
Game duration and internet cafes
Gameplay29 comments
71
votes
Normals are too competitive
Gameplay106 comments
68
votes
It's all GhostCrawler's fault!
Memes & Games25 comments
60
votes