League of Graphs makes a point about Sona

chipndip1·Dec 16, 2017·70 votes·6,437 views

When she's balanced for higher tier play, she's like 54% win rate in Bronze. If she's even close to half-decent in the pro scene, she'd just break ALL of solo queue in half (even then, she only managed a 30% win rate or so). Now that she's 50% win rate in Bronze, she's 47% win rate in Diamond and high elo avoids her like the plague. Riot, Sona's design fucking sucks. On the same grounds you guys would rework Karma (her vgu was done back when you guys did poor VGUs/her VGU was done to tackle a specific design problem, not to improve the champion, leading to new problems), do something about this champion. I'm tired of the up-and-downs. Even if you just flat buff the champion, it doesn't fix the inherent problems which makes her either straight useless or straight oppressive. Sona's balance state is horribly volatile and doesn't lend itself to being well balanced for Riot's "3-way balancing philosophy". As she is now, she's either horribly undertuned or overtuned for at least two out of three between low elo/high elo/pro play. I keep saying it only because it makes sense: Sona's kit needs a major overhaul if we're ever going to see the end of this. Fully automated Qs, Ws, and Es may have worked in 2011, but it's near 2018. Can we stop being stubborn already, guys? Like, everyone? Riot, fans, haters...everyone? Can we agree that this back-n-forth is getting silly?

119 Comments

kaironenDec 16, 201722 votes

The problem with sona is how she has no skill shots and that she forces you to react to her. I haven't played in bronze in a very long time but I'm assuming that people will not react to her properly at all and will usually lose lane. This leads to her win rate increasing. Also, her late game power has a part in it since bronze has a tendency to throw (not trying to be rude to anyone in bronze, but it is known that they throw more often). In her next rework, they should smooth out her early-mid-late instead of only being amazing at late game (she's great in early game at lower elo I believe).

chipndip1Dec 16, 20175 votes

{quoted}

The problem with sona is how she has no skill shots and that she forces you to react to her.

Literally could have been solved a year ago during that shitty mini-rework, but everyone wants to have their cake (not be required to have basic fundamentals like "aim") and eat it, too (still be/feel like a strong champion in the game). Then we got "URF Sona" instead of something that actually makes a damn difference. I can parrot it off as much as I like, but if it doesn't catch on, I'm just one voice lost in a sea of whiners and bronzies, and it's beyond frustrating.

AbyssphereDec 16, 20171 votes

You think they were going to do something as fundamental as giving Sona skillshots in a mini-rework like that? It was just a large balance pass - they didn't have resources for it like new visuals.

chipndip1Dec 16, 20172 votes

{quoted}

You think they were going to do something as fundamental as giving Sona skillshots in a mini-rework like that? It was just a large balance pass - they didn't have resources for it like new visuals.

They did it for Xin Zhao.

AbyssphereDec 17, 20171 votes

Xin's changes were part of a legitimate rework that was on the official rework schedule and everything. Sona's was a bunch of number changes done by a balance team designer who had some spare time. They're completely different scales and it's not at all fair to compare them.

Colton147Dec 16, 201716 votes

{quoted}

The problem with sona is how she has no skill shots and that she forces you to react to her. I haven't played in bronze in a very long time but I'm assuming that people will not react to her properly at all and will usually lose lane. This leads to her win rate increasing. Also, her late game power has a part in it since bronze has a tendency to throw (not trying to be rude to anyone in bronze, but it is known that they throw more often). In her next rework, they should smooth out her early-mid-late instead of only being amazing at late game (she's great in early game at lower elo I believe).

Sona 's ult is a skill shot.

(Sona Player)

RothjDec 16, 20178 votes

Hi. In 7.23 Sona had about a 53% win rate across bronze AND diamond. The problem is now that the mana cost nerf effects diamond players more than bronze players for various reasons. Sona has ways to express skill, but she has a low skill floor - there is a limit to how bad you can be with her. However, she also has a decent skill cap as well. The q is auto targeted but her powerchords and auras are fairly deep mechanics that you can use to carry if you are good with her. It's just that making her mana costs trash hurts higher elo players more than bronze players.

Edit: Also on league of graphs swap from bronze to diamond and back. You can see that sonas win rate is about the same for bronze or diamond over the years however there are also periods where she had a higher winrate in diamond than bronze. The problem is only now.

Double edit: go to opgg and set for last month. sona had 52.86% win rate in diamond over the past month with 51.70% in bronze. She was fine before the nerfs happened. Just revert them and everything is good. i also want to add that positioning is part of her skillset. She is much easier to kill than nearly any other champion in the game. To climb you have to dodge skillshots and predict ganks a lot better than other supports or champs just because she is so easy to kill.

LankPantsDec 16, 20178 votes

https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/bronze/champion/Sona/

As of the last patch she's not even overperforming in Bronze. A 50% WR for a champ as easy as Sona is a massive underperformance. This also shouldn't even be a consideration when balancing her, bronze games involve so little skill that balancing champs around them is absurd.

The biggest problem here is that Riot's balance team has simply displayed utter incompetence or a massive bias when dealing with Sona. Either they actually thought these changes were OK which shows they have no idea about the game or they didn't think they were OK which shows that they hold inconsistent standards and bias. There's no way around this, at least one of these has to be true.

BattalionDec 16, 20176 votes

Regardless of the year, Sona is a part of a champion set that are designed for beginners. Those champions are:

Annie Ashe Blitzcrank Chogath Garen Leona Nami Morgana Lux Pantheon Singed Sona Soraka Veigar Warwick Jinx Corki

As well as some I may have missed. Due to these being designed for beginners, it is imperative that they are among the easiest to perform well with. That includes auto-targeting skills. As well as powerful spells with high cooldowns and wide hitboxes, unless they are auto-targeted. These champions are inherently easy to play and teach the fundamentals of positioning, mana control, and zones. If a champion is doing well in low ELO but does not do well in higher ELO and they among those on the list above, then that is the champion design working, not design a flaw or failure.

NemeBroDec 16, 201719 votes

{quoted}

Regardless of the year, Sona is a part of a champion set that are designed for beginners. Those champions are:

As well as some I may have missed. Due to these being designed for beginners, it is imperative that they are among the easiest to perform well with. That includes auto-targeting skills. As well as powerful spells with high cooldowns and wide hitboxes, unless they are auto-targeted. These champions are inherently easy to play and teach the fundamentals of positioning, mana control, and zones. If a champion is doing well in low ELO but does not do well in higher ELO and they among those on the list above, then that is the champion design working, not design a flaw or failure.

We don't need braindead simple champions that are garbage the higher you climb but strong in low elo.

And there's a gigantic difference between successful "beginner" champions like Warwick and braindead unbalanceable garbage like Sona or Garen.

BattalionDec 16, 20173 votes

I'm not defending Garen or WW's high elo viability. To be frank, the fact that they preform well throughout the ranked ladder is, in my opinion, a design failure. New players need transitional champions in order to grow at a decent pace without feeling overwhelmed. There should always be easy champions because not everyone has had months or years of game time, perhaps they started just last month. Champions with high skill caps, lower CD skills, and so forth should be able to out preform beginner champions at the highest tiers of play. Which, for the most part is, accurate with some exceptions.

NemeBroDec 16, 201719 votes

{quoted}

I'm not defending Garen or WW's high elo viability. To be frank, the fact that they preform well throughout the ranked ladder is, in my opinion, a design failure.

Your opinion is bad, as well as wrong.

New players need transitional champions in order to grow at a decent pace without feeling overwhelmed.

Like Warwick, who is still a viable champion at all levels of play and has room for skill expression, unlike shitty failed designs like Sona or Garen.

There should always be easy champions because not everyone has had months or years of game time, perhaps they started just last month.

Sure, but those easier champions shouldn't be worthless garbage in play with people who aren't braindead.

Champions with high skill caps, lower CD skills, and so forth should be able to out preform beginner champions at the highest tiers of play. Which, for the most part is, accurate with some exceptions.

No they shouldn't, and no it really isn't. The idea that a higher skillcap should come with higher power should not be rigidly enforced like you're saying, and this is coming from a Yasuo main ("Dude Yasuo is zero skill XD"). Thankfully, this isn't really accurate. The meta is always shifting. Sometimes a low skillcap ADC like Tristana will be top tier. Right now, a medium to high skillcap ADC like Ezreal is. Ezreal also has a pretty low skill floor. Easy to play, relatively hard to master. Where do champions like those fit into your ideas on balance? Because Master Yi for example is much higher skill cap than Rammus for example is, yet Rammus is considerably better than he is. Both are very low skill floor.

BattalionDec 16, 20174 votes

It's clear that you're not wanting intelligent or civilized discussion. So I won't continue with this.

NemeBroDec 16, 201710 votes

{quoted}

It's clear that you're not wanting intelligent or civilized discussion. So I won't continue with this.

I provided a bit more to the conversation than someone who just stated their (wrong) opinion of the game my friend.

hoyohaiDec 16, 201713 votes

No you didn't. You added to the conversation by stating your own opinion, but you removed a bit from it by saying his opinion was wrong without any backup whatsoever.

NemeBroDec 16, 20177 votes

{quoted}

No you didn't. You added to the conversation by stating your own opinion, but you removed a bit from it by saying his opinion was wrong without any backup whatsoever.

Incorrect, I provided examples of relatively simple to pick up champions for beginners like Warwick who still have room for the player to grow with them and can be viable in about every level of play.

It is rather self-evident how that is better than a champion who has essentially zero skill expression or usability past gold. The former provides all the beginner friendly qualities of the latter and then some. It's better design. To argue otherwise is simply to be wrong.

I also pointed out how flawed his incredibly simplistic idea that "harder champions should be better" was, since skill floor and skill cap are not synonymous. Rumble is relatively high skill floor, low skill cap. Yi is very low skill floor, but with a much higher skill cap than Rumble. All other things being equal, who should be better in decent elos?

hoyohaiDec 16, 20173 votes

I'll give you that, but you still haven't explained why his opinion was wrong

NemeBroDec 16, 20178 votes

{quoted}

I'll give you that, but you still haven't explained why his opinion was wrong

But I literally did though. He said the game needs simple champions who are dog shit once you start playing at a decent level and if any champion is good for beginners that can be used in higher elos then there is a design problem. I literally illustrated why that isn't the case just now, which should frankly be self-evident. His position is indefensible.

chipndip1Dec 16, 20178 votes

{quoted}

It's clear that you're not wanting intelligent or civilized discussion. So I won't continue with this.

No, your argument just sucks horribly. Skill floor should not, and normally does not, dictate character strength in ANY game. It does correlate with some things that relate to that, like general fluidity in their games (higher skill floor characters tend to be more mobile and have crazy options at the price of glaring weaknesses and tougher mechanical input requirements), but that doesn't mean that EVERY or MOST EVERY high skill floor character should be tiers above the lower ones. Otherwise, pro gaming legends like Daigo Umehara wouldn't exist.

BattalionDec 16, 20171 votes

There would be no reason for high skill cap champions if the above is true. Why would you ever want a higher skill ceiling when the META (method of easiest tactical advantage) would always be the beginner champions? Which are easy. You would be jumping through more hoops for no advantage. The fact that there are champions with high skill caps (not that they aren't easy to preform ok with with base knowledge, but their skill ceiling is very high) such as Zed, Yasuo, Riven, and so forth destroys the argument that all champions have the same potential power. I can't continue with this thread, there's very little logic and just a lot of downvote spam. The fact that there are one-tricks that main some of the above characters and do well with in high elo is more about personal skill and mastery above those of their peers within their matches.

Also I never mentioned skill floor. I only ever referenced or alluded to skill ceiling. With "Highest tiers of play" in my original statement. As well as other direct statements about skill cap/ceiling/potential. Now I know how Rioters feel when you all spin their words around and take things out of context or insert your own words into my arguments or explanations.

Sona PingDec 16, 20174 votes

{quoted}

There would be no reason for high skill cap champions if the above is true. Why would you ever want a higher skill ceiling when the META (method of easiest tactical advantage) would always be the beginner champions? Which are easy. You would be jumping through more hoops for no advantage. The fact that there are champions with high skill caps (not that they aren't easy to preform ok with with base knowledge, but their skill ceiling is very high) such as Zed, Yasuo, Riven, and so forth destroys the argument that all champions have the same potential power. I can't continue with this thread, there's very little logic and just a lot of downvote spam. The fact that there are one-tricks that main some of the above characters and do well with in high elo is more about personal skill and mastery above those of their peers within their matches.

Also I never mentioned skill floor. I only ever referenced or alluded to skill ceiling. With "Highest tiers of play" in my original statement. As well as other direct statements about skill cap/ceiling/potential. Now I know how Rioters feel when you all spin their words around and take things out of context or insert your own words into my arguments or explanations.

Meta doesn't mean that. Like at all. And you are further bringing up champions like Riven to support your argument when Riven is bad in high level play.

BattalionDec 16, 20172 votes

What does meta mean then?

Also, I think you should tell Box Box that, a Riven top main. Riven is a high skill cap champion, I never said they were particularly good in high ranked play.

Sona PingDec 16, 20175 votes

{quoted}

What does meta mean then?

Also, I think you should tell Box Box that, a Riven top main. Riven is a high skill cap champion, I never said they were particularly good in high ranked play.

I know Boxbox, he's good at Riven. But I won't tell him that, he knows that he doesn't participate in high level play already. Also, you did use that to support your argument.

chipndip1Dec 16, 20173 votes

{quoted}

There would be no reason for high skill cap champions if the above is true. Why would you ever want a higher skill ceiling when the META (method of easiest tactical advantage) would always be the beginner champions? Which are easy. You would be jumping through more hoops for no advantage. The fact that there are champions with high skill caps (not that they aren't easy to preform ok with with base knowledge, but their skill ceiling is very high) such as Zed, Yasuo, Riven, and so forth destroys the argument that all champions have the same potential power. I can't continue with this thread, there's very little logic and just a lot of downvote spam. The fact that there are one-tricks that main some of the above characters and do well with in high elo is more about personal skill and mastery above those of their peers within their matches.

No one said that any champs have the same potential power. We said skill cap doesn't dictate that. Perfect examples? ZED, RIVEN, AND YASUO.
The reason you're getting downvoted is because no one's buying what your pushing. Your argument's horribly flawed.

Also I never mentioned skill floor. I only ever referenced or alluded to skill ceiling. With "Highest tiers of play" in my original statement. As well as other direct statements about skill cap/ceiling/potential. Now I know how Rioters feel when you all spin their words around and take things out of context or insert your own words into my arguments or explanations.

Skill floor. Skill ceiling. Point still stands regardless. None of those things normally dictate overall strength in competitive games. They may have some correlation, but there's no causation.

BattalionDec 17, 20171 votes

You all keep saying I'm full of shit but none of you ever answer the main question and point that I am making:

WHAT IS THE POINT OF HARDER CHARACTERS IN A COMPETITIVE GAME WHEN OVERALL STRENGTH IS THE SAME?

Now when you dodge that question again I can rest assured I tried. Not once, but several times in this entire thread to get this question answered only to get dodged. For fuck's sake honestly my faith in the intelligence of you all has greatly diminished.

chipndip1Dec 17, 20172 votes

{quoted}

You all keep saying I'm full of shit but none of you ever answer the main question and point that I am making:

WHAT IS THE POINT OF HARDER CHARACTERS IN A COMPETITIVE GAME WHEN OVERALL STRENGTH IS THE SAME?

Now when you dodge that question again I can rest assured I tried. Not once, but several times in this entire thread to get this question answered only to get dodged. For fuck's sake honestly my faith in the intelligence of you all has greatly diminished.

Here's the thing: No one dodged the question. You just don't accept the answer. But if I have to spell it out for you:

The point of higher skill cap characters in competitive games is that higher skill cap characters tend to have more options to tackle difficult situations. Example would be comparing Ryu to Akuma in the Street Fighter franchise. Although their move sets are very similar, Akuma is always either the squishiest or one of the squishiest characters in any game he's featured in. To compensate, he has a couple of unique tools exclusive to him in comparison to other "Shoto" characters (characters derived from Ryu's play style) and has unique properties on his more generalized moves that give him more offensive options, more hit-confirms for combos, and unique ways to deal with situations others would have a harder time with (like escaping from corners), as well as attack in new ways similar characters (like Ryu) aren't able to (fireballs from the air. Dive kicks. His infamous Raging Demon special). So playing Akuma is like playing a higher risk, higher reward Ryu.

With that in mind, generally difficult characters are supposed to be able to have the chance to break boundaries in new ways, while simpler characters are rewarded with stability and consistency. That's the usually understood trade-off between simple and complex character designs in competitive games, complete with an in-depth example. Now, I ALREADY SAID THIS, but this is me fully explaining in detail so you can move on from this already.

BattalionDec 17, 20171 votes

I fail to see how your explanation is different than my own. Using your examples: Akuma is harder to master and can out preform Ryu but with more risk. That's because Akuma has a higher skill floor and ceiling. The trade off for his difficulty in comparison to Ryu is that Akuma has a higher potential power. High Risk/High Reward, the high reward is the higher potential. Semantics really. Yet somehow I'm the "idiot" with an "indefensible" position.

Champions with high skill caps, lower CD skills, and so forth should be able to out preform beginner champions at the highest tiers of play. Which, for the most part is, accurate with some exceptions.

Look at that.

chipndip1Dec 17, 20172 votes

{quoted}

I fail to see how your explanation is different than my own. Using your examples: Akuma is harder to master and can out preform Ryu but with more risk. That's because Akuma has a higher skill floor and ceiling. The trade off for his difficulty in comparison to Ryu is that Akuma has a higher potential power. High Risk/High Reward, the high reward is the higher potential. Semantics really. Yet somehow I'm the "idiot" with an "indefensible" position.

Look at that.

Outperform =/= Ability to do things. Just cause you have options doesn't mean you're BLATANTLY better than everyone else. Akuma isn't always top tier, despite the things I stated. In SFIII: Third Strike, Ken was better than Akuma on the tier lists, but he was only marginally different from Ryu. Hell, in SFIV, Cammy was one of the simplest characters in the game, but for many versions of that game, she was one of the stronger, if not strongest, characters in the pro scene. This is why I said skill floor/cap doesn't dictate the overall strength of a character in competitive games. It usually effects how linear/complex a character tends to be, but not how strong they are. It's two different concepts.

BattalionDec 17, 20171 votes

There is nothing wrong or uncommon about having a higher maximum potential for a character and then achieving that maximum potential, which then gives an advantage, no matter how slight you may want to make it (because most of it isn't in raw stats but in play making potential and follow ups). I never argued that champions in League of Legends were supposed to be more powerful than another except for when the skill ceilings are drastically different. I fully expect a Challenger Zed to out preform a Challenger Sona. Out preform does not mean instantly kill or just face roll that character, It doesn't even have to be Sona and Zed. Any non-complex character vs a complex character. When at the highest tiers of play , where champion potential is realized, higher skill ceiling champions should, by design, be 'better'. Otherwise you have wasted your time in the competitive scene doing more work for no pay off, the only thing you get from that is bragging points. If you are tasked to build a bridge and a single fallen tree counts as a bridge and you'll get your pay check, why would you build a suspension bridge? There's more work for the same pay off. It makes no sense. While this may not be realized in the game that is how the design should be . However , you get threads like this wondering why Sona isn't viable in the top .02% of players (Challenger) where other champions are. Then I get on here, explain that some champions do not have the same potential as others because they are catered to new players, with lower skill ceilings and what happens? I get downvoted into oblivion because people either don't like what I'm saying, regardless if it is true, or they just don't understand the concepts of design. That not every champion is designed for high elo play. I'm not going to apologize that Sona mains have a hard time in leagues above Gold/Plat, that kind of skill tier for players should be more towards the higher skill ceiling champions and it often is. If Mastery of an easy champion yields the same results as mastery of a complex champion, there is very little reason not to seek out the easiest champions that fit each roll. Which this not the case, as is shown with LCS teams sticking to high ceiling champions such as Azir before his nerfing, because he had better potential and more "power" in the game.

At this point I've summarized and explained my view on this too many times. I won't be responding to anything more on this topic from here on.

chipndip1Dec 17, 20173 votes

{quoted}

There is nothing wrong or uncommon about having a higher maximum potential for a character and then achieving that maximum potential, which then gives an advantage, no matter how slight you may want to make it (because most of it isn't in raw stats but in play making potential and follow ups). I never argued that champions in League of Legends were supposed to be more powerful than another except for when the skill ceilings are drastically different. I fully expect a Challenger Zed to out preform a Challenger Sona.

Then your understanding of competitive gaming is completely bent over backwards. Assassin champs like Zed are regularly outperformed by tanks and supports, even when they're mechanically more difficult to play.

You don't HAVE to respond again. You have a poor understanding of the subject, so it'd be a waste to constantly ram the fact into you. I've given multiple examples to try to make the point. You just don't get it. Don't bother trying anymore.

Troll for TrumpDec 16, 20177 votes

Ryze the best beginner champ kappa

BattalionDec 16, 20176 votes

I've always said Ryze is impossible to master to because the moment someone becomes absurdly good with him, Riot reworks his kit again.

Malix FarwinDec 16, 201716 votes

{quoted}

Regardless of the year, Sona is a part of a champion set that are designed for beginners. Those champions are:

As well as some I may have missed. Due to these being designed for beginners, it is imperative that they are among the easiest to perform well with. That includes auto-targeting skills. As well as powerful spells with high cooldowns and wide hitboxes, unless they are auto-targeted. These champions are inherently easy to play and teach the fundamentals of positioning, mana control, and zones. If a champion is doing well in low ELO but does not do well in higher ELO and they among those on the list above, then that is the champion design working, not design a flaw or failure.

did you just say nami and jinx are for beginners?

TotalJerkDec 16, 201718 votes

Jinx is pretty beginner friendly.

ThilmerDec 16, 201713 votes

[{quoted}](name=Malix Farwin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=BUO6g0oL,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2017-12-16T05:39:03.243+0000)

did you just say nami and jinx are for beginners?

And Singed too, notice how he says Singed is for beginners. Da fuq?

5000000000000000Dec 16, 20173 votes

The kit itself is simple but how he's played isn't at all

Rathe6Dec 16, 20176 votes

[{quoted}](name=Malix Farwin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=BUO6g0oL,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2017-12-16T05:39:03.243+0000)

did you just say nami and jinx are for beginners?

Corki made his list too

chipndip1Dec 16, 20176 votes

{quoted}

Regardless of the year, Sona is a part of a champion set that are designed for beginners. Those champions are:

As well as some I may have missed. Due to these being designed for beginners, it is imperative that they are among the easiest to perform well with. That includes auto-targeting skills. As well as powerful spells with high cooldowns and wide hitboxes, unless they are auto-targeted. These champions are inherently easy to play and teach the fundamentals of positioning, mana control, and zones. If a champion is doing well in low ELO but does not do well in higher ELO and they among those on the list above, then that is the champion design working, not design a flaw or failure.

So you're saying that it's perfectly fine to put noob traps in a competitive game?

Because what on Earth is the point of a character if we are all in agreement that they aren't designed to actually be good picks more than they're designed to teach you how to play? If that's the case, just learn the game on a different character that's kinda simple, but isn't trash.

Edit: And Corki constantly pops in and out of pro play. The hell you mean he's similar to Garen and Sona?

BattalionDec 16, 20171 votes

It is perfectly fine to put in champions that preform well at a lower skill level, yes. It is also equally all right to put in high skill potential champions into that same mix. That's what competitive games are about. If all champions had the same max potential power then there would be no reason to have mechanically intensive champions because that'd be more work for no payoff. The fact that pro's play some of these, such as Leona and Morgana, does not mean that they are mechanically intensive. That just means their power or their utility is too good for a team comp to pass up. Team building is a lot more than just potential power.

D357R0Y3RDec 16, 20173 votes

{quoted}

It is perfectly fine to put in champions that preform well at a lower skill level, yes.

it isn't...

what is fine is to put a champion easily understanable but also performing differently if used by a beginner or a high elo player like new warwick!

NineTailedMysticDec 16, 20173 votes

Because those "high skill potential" champions become unbearable at high elo. Remember when Azir was too good when played well and was pick ban in both high elo and competitive? It's garbage for diversity.

TotalJerkDec 16, 20177 votes

Singed? What?

EfficientDynamoDec 16, 201710 votes

Yeah he included WAY too many non-beginner champs for that to be an accident. He doesn't really know what he is talking about.

BattalionDec 16, 20171 votes

Obviously. Since Singed is such a mechanically intensive champion. He was also rated, by Riot, as the easiest champion to do well with, with a terrible connection due to his main damage coming from just running around the map. There is very little mechanics involved, all it has to do is with map awareness.

TotalJerkDec 16, 20178 votes

There's far more factors that go into how difficult a champion is than pure mechanical demands.

ThefrostyvikingDec 16, 20171 votes

Ashe is not beginner friendly though, she has a simple kit but you get beaten silly for nearly any and all mistakes you make.

She also requires a precise skill to land her ultimate, that thing is pretty obvious so most see it coming, and you have to hit it anyway.

Then how she has to keep reapplying her passive to actually deal any damage at all x)

Cho is also a bit doubtful, he get's punished quite a lot if he misses Q or if the opponent avoids his E.

Nami is.....not really beginner friendly either, bubble is a pretty slow but very important skillshot, heal needs to be timed and positioned for maximum effect and ulti is also a skillshot,even if a big one.

Lux is pretty friendly but a "new" one doesn't really do anything, at all, since you need to land your skillshots pretty perfectly to score skills, and she also dies for almost any mistake she makes if she commits.

BattalionDec 17, 20171 votes

Despite her being a 450 RP champion and the tutorial champion, she is somehow supposed to be not for beginners? The 450RP set is for the first 15 champions for people to qualify for draft pick. Garen, Annie, and company are also a part of that set and it isn't a coincidence. There are some of the 450's that are harder to play than the other but once you get up into the 3150 and 4800 champions you start to see the evolution of the League roster towards its already developed player base.

Edit:

My mistake. I meant IP (Influence Points) it's what was before Blue Essence (BE) in case you were not around.

RP = IP in this case. I'll put that in an edit.

ThefrostyvikingDec 17, 20171 votes

As i wrote, her kit is simple but her rework made mistakes really harshly punished, you have to consistently attack and not get caught to even get any results out of her, unlike say caitlyn or Tristana.

And if you can't land any ults you basically have no midgame, and lategame will be gimped too.

I honestly think Tristana, Cait and Jinx are a lot more forgiving to play o_o

Even MF when strong.

D357R0Y3RDec 16, 20176 votes

https://i.gyazo.com/79b44df610adbbb02ad8a8721ff8ae09.png

https://i.gyazo.com/f97140b2368f967c19269ccc737d255b.png

i have to say the one who thought increasing sona Q mana cost by 50% without any compensation was either not good in his job or intended to make her worse than pre-buff zyra

what trully amazes me is that a nerf to enchanters is being done "for the greatest good" and even with that we refuse to talk about sona and an eventual rework

the problem with sona's kit isn't that Q/W/E is automated, Vladimir works perfectly fine and his spells aren't dodgeable

the problem is that her power is so huge while being reliable that it forces the design to be compensated by the lack of survivability it essentially tells you "kill sona if you want to win" but it tells you "kill sona, we made her kit extremely easily to be facerolled by an assassin or a diver" because she has 325 base ms, squishy as hell, no hard cc on low cd, really low healing/shielding

then, this makes sona's gameplay being an aura bot that has to hope for the enemy team to be incompetent to not be able to kill her, because sona has almost 0 impact on what will happen she can try to heal herself increase her bonus ms, and stun for a short duration if her ult is avaible and that's it, compared to lulu's selfpeeling, sona just has to hope the enemy team is not clever/strong enough to kill her

and then it baffles me even more that this design is not put on the top of priority list of VGU/GU, that design is the most imbalanced design of all time i swear to god i can't remember something more imbalanced than that

and you pointed it out, whenever sona is balanced in high tier, she roflstomp lower tier...

[sona-playing]

ThilmerDec 16, 20176 votes

They should have reworked her when they had the chance, instead of doing those stupid changes in numbers they did.