Skarner hotfix someday?

hgjkdlsaf jeldvb·Aug 24, 2015·2 votes·906 views

I remember zyra getting beat over the head with a nerf bat when she got released, but skarner's coming up on a week with a 65% winrate from players who have literally just picked him up. I'd like my ban back.

6 Comments

Wind WhistlerAug 24, 20151 votes

He deserves the spot he's at now. He's been at the bottom or around the bottom for a while, I think he should have his own little moment.

DesideriumAug 24, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Wind Whistler,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=At1cokFu,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-08-24T22:03:49.013+0000)

He deserves the spot he's at now. He's been at the bottom or around the bottom for a while, I think he should have his own little moment.

It's logic like this that makes me glad Riot is in charge and not people like you.

Wind WhistlerSep 3, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Tomb of Insomnia,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=At1cokFu,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2015-08-24T22:08:48.530+0000)

It's logic like this that makes me glad Riot is in charge and not people like you.

Own little moment. As in the one week time span people could play him before he got nerfed. No champion should be op forever, everything should be balanced out eventually.

hgjkdlsaf jeldvbAug 25, 20151 votes

No, he doesn't. No champ deserves to be at 65%, regardless of how long they've been at the bottom. It's not about making up for lost time, it's about balancing this fucking game. Just because a champ got nerfed, doesn't mean they deserve and equal quantity of buffs. When Riot buffs or nerfs a champion, they typically do so in an attempt to balance the game. Obviously, they're human, and get it wrong sometimes (more than they should, imo, but that's a different discussion). Clearly, you're missing that point, otherwise you wouldn't assert that a champ deserves to be strong because they were weak. The point of balance changes is to balance the game, or at the very least, keep a reasonably diverse set of champs in a viable state. Win rates are a zero sum game. If skarner gets 65%, everyone else is losing a fraction of a percent they would have otherwise had. Skarner being this strong literally contributes to the inviability of other champions. The champs he counters get it even worse.

Having a champ you like at say, 35%, for a similar extreme sucks, but that's significantly healthier than having a champ at 65%. The reason is actually really simple. If a champ is bad, they see less play. They aren't banned. They don't effect most games in any way. If a champ is dominant, they become a massive consideration in champ select. Do we ban them? Do we pick them? Do we try to counterpick them? If they get into game, how do we deal with them? Are we upset at our team captain for not banning an obviously broken champ? All of these pretty much need to be considered when dealing with an overpowered champ. When Riot nerfed Eve into the ground (when they removed her stun) and left her for what felt like 2 years (can anyone verify?), They didn't buff her to 70% win rate to make up for it. They attempted to rerelease her in a healthier state. Most people were just happy to have her back. She may have been on the strong side, but ultimately, what this game needs is competitive champs, not auto-win champs.

Having a champ that oppressively strong has massive impact on the game; it is meta-warpingly strong, and is fundamentally blasphemous in any competitive game. So no, he has no business being this strong.

Wind WhistlerSep 3, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=hgjkdlsaf jeldvb,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=At1cokFu,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2015-08-25T17:22:29.937+0000)

No, he doesn't. No champ deserves to be at 65%, regardless of how long they've been at the bottom. It's not about making up for lost time, it's about balancing this fucking game. Just because a champ got nerfed, doesn't mean they deserve and equal quantity of buffs. When Riot buffs or nerfs a champion, they typically do so in an attempt to balance the game. Obviously, they're human, and get it wrong sometimes (more than they should, imo, but that's a different discussion). Clearly, you're missing that point, otherwise you wouldn't assert that a champ deserves to be strong because they were weak. The point of balance changes is to balance the game, or at the very least, keep a reasonably diverse set of champs in a viable state. Win rates are a zero sum game. If skarner gets 65%, everyone else is losing a fraction of a percent they would have otherwise had. Skarner being this strong literally contributes to the inviability of other champions. The champs he counters get it even worse.

Having a champ you like at say, 35%, for a similar extreme sucks, but that's significantly healthier than having a champ at 65%. The reason is actually really simple. If a champ is bad, they see less play. They aren't banned. They don't effect most games in any way. If a champ is dominant, they become a massive consideration in champ select. Do we ban them? Do we pick them? Do we try to counterpick them? If they get into game, how do we deal with them? Are we upset at our team captain for not banning an obviously broken champ? All of these pretty much need to be considered when dealing with an overpowered champ. When Riot nerfed Eve into the ground (when they removed her stun) and left her for what felt like 2 years (can anyone verify?), They didn't buff her to 70% win rate to make up for it. They attempted to rerelease her in a healthier state. Most people were just happy to have her back. She may have been on the strong side, but ultimately, what this game needs is competitive champs, not auto-win champs.

Having a champ that oppressively strong has massive impact on the game; it is meta-warpingly strong, and is fundamentally blasphemous in any competitive game. So no, he has no business being this strong.

You brought up a good point. I didn't think that far into it, in that having a high winrate makes other champions have lower winrates(I know pretty stupid), but I think you took what I said too seriously. What I meant by "own little moment" is the patch we were in 10 days ago, not forever. No champion should be so strong forever.