So lux is getting buffed with 52.67% winrate and 8.61% pickrate.

manbearswine·Aug 22, 2015·16 votes·1,796 views

Does this mean we are finally done with shit winrate balancing?

Does it mean we might finally see thresh nerfs?

48 Comments

The FastAug 22, 20159 votes

Except this "winrate" balancing was never a thing. The only people that think the game should be balanced around winrate are people who don't understand balance.

manbearswineAug 22, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Knight Kore,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=GL7fELeN,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-08-22T14:27:36.610+0000)

Except this "winrate" balancing was never a thing.

Except that it very much is,how many times do you see "but his winrate is good",in a thread complaining about balance? What were the latest jinx nerfs aimed at? In fact in plenty of cases you see rioters talking about winrates and how champions like sona are somehow strong(the only thing which thinks she is strong is her winrate,no good player thinks that way).

Why would they buff lee sin? Why do they fucking refuse to nerf thresh even though he is clearly a fucking joke?

The only people that think the game should be balanced around winrate are people who don't understand balance.

No,they are just people who play champions with low winrates and use that as an excuse to ask for buffs for lee sin(/etc).

Not to mention,you see riot outright balancing around it plenty of times,I mean take zyra for example,confirmed for buffs soon(So nooblords can't argue that she is fine anymore,or can they?),good winrate for years,considered shit+shit pickrate for years,and they only remembered she exists recently(and lets be honest here,there's a good chance the changes won't achieve much and they'll forget she exists for a couple more years),winrate balancing clearly is very much a thing,A thing I want to be out of this game.

The FastAug 22, 20155 votes

Except they never say "Winrate is x, therefore champ y is strong." Winrates by themselves don't mean anything. But winrate with context does. Sona feels like shit to play, but that doesn't mean she's the worst support in the game, it means she FEELS like she's the worst. Its the same problem people have with Veigar.

People around here that complain about winrate tend to be people who you don't want to listen to. Winrate with context is an important tool with which to gauge balance, but not the only, and the ones professionals talk about most often because its the least complex way to show people metrics of balance.

Balance was never done around winrate. Riot has already commented on how Lee Sin's winrate is artificially deflated due to his high skillcap and popularity. There is no reason for Lee Sin, in his current state, to reach 50% winrate. The buff was made to lower his skill floor and barrier to entry, not to artificially inflate his winrate.

If winrate was all they looked at while balancing, then there are a hefty number of champions that should be getting massive buffs before Lee Sin.

manbearswineAug 22, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Knight Kore,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=GL7fELeN,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T16:15:20.363+0000)

Except they never say "Winrate is x, therefore champ y is strong."

They pretty much do,it generally goes something like this:

"Hmm,I'm completely clueless about this champion,and the role it is played,and quite possibly as to how this game works in general,let's check winrate:" If winrate is low: "lists a bunch of weaknesses,yeah that champion is in a pretty bad spot" If winrate is high: "lol no the champion is really good lists some strengths this champion has "

They might not outright say it(though they often do),but winrate is 100% behind their reasoning,and everything they say is confirmation bias built upon it.

Winrates by themselves don't mean anything. But winrate with context does. Sona feels like shit to play, but that doesn't mean she's the worst support in the game, it means she FEELS like she's the worst.

First of all worst is a bit of strong word,let's use "really bad" instead,and yes,sona is in fact really bad,she doesn't just feel really bad to play,she is a really bad pick overall,sona's kit has stayed more or less the same(yes even with the rework) for a long period of time,yet her pickrate dropped like a brick,now why would that happen if her feel stayed more or less the same?

Its the same problem people have with Veigar.

Veigar is again legitimately a bad champion,even his winrate isn't good(so the comparison isn't great),yes he also feels bad to play,but that's cause he is bad.

People around here that complain about winrate tend to be people who you don't want to listen to.

The issue is that they are in very large numbers,plenty of threads are downvoted into obscurity by them,I think it's time to officially drop this method,and tell these people their arguments are worth shit.

Balance was never done around winrate.

Tell that to jinx,tell that to zyra,tell it to amumu,and tell it to sona(Why do you think sona was nerfed after her rework?).

Riot has already commented on how Lee Sin's winrate is artificially deflated due to his high skillcap and popularity.

And yet in plenty of cases they claim a champion to be doing well based on winrate alone,if you look at sona their statements are that she is considered bad at higher elos,whereas she is supposedly strong in lower elos,based on her winrate.

There is no reason for Lee Sin, in his current state, to reach 50% winrate. The buff was made to lower his skill floor and barrier to entry, not to artificially inflate his winrate.

The buff still gives better lee sin players another option to use their skills,not to mention that his energy buff is just a pure buff,aimed at everyone equally.

If winrate was all they looked at while balancing, then there are a hefty number of champions that should be getting massive buffs before Lee Sin.

I never said it was the only thing,I said it was a major factor,and I think it's time to put this trash method in the dumpster where it belongs.

The FastAug 22, 20156 votes

I'm not going to respond to the full post, running short on time.

But if winrate was REALLY the only thing looked at, then Heimerdinger, Amumu, and Malz would have been nerfed a long time ago.

manbearswineAug 22, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Knight Kore,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=GL7fELeN,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T19:42:00.240+0000)

I'm not going to respond to the full post, running short on time.

But if winrate was REALLY the only thing looked at, then Heimerdinger, Amumu, and Malz would have been nerfed a long time ago.

"I never said it was the only thing,I said it was a major factor,and I think it's time to put this trash method in the dumpster where it belongs."

AMYS GRAVEAug 22, 20154 votes

"I never said it was the only thing,I said it was a major factor,and I think it's time to put this trash method in the dumpster where it belongs."

You would have to pull it out of the landfill first.

manbearswineAug 22, 20151 votes

{quoted}

You would have to pull it out of the landfill first.

The last (hyper) obvious case of winrate balancing were the last sona nerfs,which werent done too long ago.

AMYS GRAVEAug 22, 20154 votes

Sona wasn't nerfed because of her winrate, she was nerfed because of her oppressive and non-interactive play style. Her win rates were a symptom of that nerf, not the cause.

A Wild AP SonaAug 22, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Sona wasn't nerfed because of her winrate, she was nerfed because of her oppressive and non-interactive play style. Her win rates were a symptom of that nerf, not the cause.

only bad kids think sona is oppressive I consider her afree FB when playing as any champion

AMYS GRAVEAug 23, 20154 votes

A main claiming their champ is weak with no reasoning? Never seen that before \kappa

A Wild AP SonaAug 23, 20157 votes

{quoted}

A main claiming their champ is weak with no reasoning? Never seen that before \kappa

I lose lane 60-70% of time in real elo sona is a joke

some picks like naut/graves naut/draven you basically automatically lose lane with 0% chance of winning because you literally cant do anything with your little 40 damage poke

and I may be right in saying I dont think I have ever beat a d3+ draven that rushs BT first becasue he basically makes the existence of a sona poking him completely pointless

AMYS GRAVEAug 23, 20155 votes

Her poke is way more than 40... don't try to ignore her passive, we all know it does work in lane. Turns out you are underselling her trading damage by a factor of almost 6x.

40 damage on q, plus 50% AP scaling, targeted so it can't miss, onto two targets, plus that passive which gives you 40% extra damage on her AA, plus her 50AD.

so with some basic AP runes and masteries along with a spellthiefs edge start you get roughly 50 AP meaning your q+AA poke does

(40 + 0.5*50 )2 targets magic damage + (50 physical + (13+500.2)(sonas passive damage)magic )*1.4 (sonas passive for q)

or .... 162 magic damage and 70 physical at level 1.

In comparison a draven aa with runes and masteries at level 1 does ~75 physical damage.

Don't even act like you lose trades as sona. I can do the math. It's embarrassing.

M Dragon14Aug 23, 20155 votes

Lets not even add the fact if sona's adc also attacked with sona's Q buff.....

A Wild AP SonaAug 24, 20156 votes

{quoted}

Her poke is way more than 40... don't try to ignore her passive, we all know it does work in lane. Turns out you are underselling her trading damage by a factor of almost 6x.

40 damage on q, plus 50% AP scaling, targeted so it can't miss, onto two targets, plus that passive which gives you 40% extra damage on her AA, plus her 50AD.

so with some basic AP runes and masteries along with a spellthiefs edge start you get roughly 50 AP meaning your q+AA poke does

(40 + 0.5*50 )2 targets magic damage + (50 physical + (13+500.2)(sonas passive damage)magic )*1.4 (sonas passive for q)

or .... 162 magic damage and 70 physical at level 1.

In comparison a draven aa with runes and masteries at level 1 does ~75 physical damage.

Don't even act like you lose trades as sona. I can do the math. It's embarrassing.

implying you can force a 550 range AA VS draven/nautilus/thresh/blitz when they will flash just to reposition/dravens speed buff/knockup
implying draven has no life steal with a vamp scepter so risking your life to deal 100 damage is basically made worthless within several aa/relic shield heals
only a garbage sona would run 20-30 in ap runes just to get 10-15 early game dmg compared to 30 cdr end game for free 40 cdr its infinitely more valueable as a duelist/team fighter with sonas high ass CD than another 10-15 damage
implying a draven for some reason isnt using his axe passive + you constantly have your power chord passive up somehow (what the fuck!?)
implying draven isnt going to use e to knock you up/haste and get 2-3 more free aas on you when you were just within 550 range of basically the best pursuing lane bully on league of legends
implying the naut/thresh/blitz waiting in bush wont just flash hook ignite you
implying you didnt just give up first blood to your lane in first 2 minutes of game for being a low elo 450 hp sona that thinks you can disrespect some other player thats going to be a top 100 draven player
the only thing embarrassing is the fact your a low elo trying to lecture the best sona in the world on how sona gameplay pans out
come back and talk to me when you constantly are on the front page of league of legends with thousands of players watching you everytime you play ranked

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20153 votes

wow, 7 upvotes in less than 10 min 14 comments into the thread? Good job using your smurfs to upvote your own comment.

implying you can force a 550 range AA VS draven/nautilus/thresh/blitz when they will flash just to reposition/dravens speed buff/knockup

lol if you burned flash for a trade, that is the definition of worth.

implying draven has no life steal with a vamp scepter so risking your life to deal 100 damage is basically made worthless within several aa/relic shield heals

Implying you can't poke again. Relic shield heals 80 every 60 seconds, you can poke for that much damage without the AA or the passive every 8 seconds. Draven at level 1 with dorans gets 3% lifesteal for 70AD AA means he gets 3 HP. Again, i can do the math and you are embarrassing yourself.

only a garbage sona would run 20-30 in ap runes just to get 10-15 early game dmg compared to 30 cdr end game its infinitely more valueable as a duelist/team fighter with sonas high ass CD than another 10-15 damage

So she gets her abilities more often and dishes out more damage overall? Thanks for making my argument easy.

implying a draven for some reason isnt using his axe passive (what the fuck!?)

implying draven isnt going to use e to knock you up/haste and get 2-3 more free aas on you when you were just within 550 range of basically the best pursuing lane bully on league of legends

We are talking level one, did he level q or e? pick one you can't have it both ways. If you aren't going to bother being intellectually consistent then there is no reasoning with you.

implying the naut/thresh/blitz waiting in bush wont just flash hook ignite you

You ignored your adc's ability to contribute to the trade, what are they doing? Either both teams get both people to trade or neither do. If you aren't going to bother being intellectually consistent then there is no reasoning with you.

implying you didnt just give up first blood to your lane in first 2 minutes of game for being a low elo 450 hp sona that thinks you can disrespect some other player thats going to be a top 100 draven player

What? Play smart and you're fine, you're just arguing that a bad player will lose to a good one, that has nothing to do with Sona's trading patterns, strengths, or weaknesses.

the only thing embarrassing is the fact your a low elo shit stain trying to lecture the best sona in the world on how sona gameplay pans out

come back and talk to me when you constantly are on the front page of league of legends with thousands of players watching you everytime you play ranked

Sure insult me and wave your rank around when you know you have no argument. Clearly good reasoning. My best solace is that when you say things like "low elo shit stain" i know you'll be banned and no one will have to deal with your bad attitude again.

A Wild AP SonaAug 24, 20156 votes

{quoted}

wow, 7 upvotes in less than 10 min 14 comments into the thread? Good job using your smurfs to upvote your own comment.

lol if you burned flash for a trade, that is the definition of worth.

Implying you can't poke again. Relic shield heals 80 every 60 seconds, you can poke for that much damage without the AA or the passive every 8 seconds. Draven at level 1 with dorans gets 3% lifesteal for 70AD AA means he gets 3 HP. Again, i can do the math and you are embarrassing yourself.

So she gets her abilities more often and dishes out more damage overall? Thanks for making my argument easy.

We are talking level one, did he level q or e? pick one you can't have it both ways. If you aren't going to bother being intellectually consistent then there is no reasoning with you.

You ignored your adc's ability to contribute to the trade, what are they doing? Either both teams get both people to trade or neither do. If you aren't going to bother being intellectually consistent then there is no reasoning with you.

What? Play smart and you're fine, you're just arguing that a bad player will lose to a good one, that has nothing to do with Sona's trading patterns, strengths, or weaknesses.

Sure insult me and wave your rank around when you know you have no argument. Clearly good reasoning. My best solace is that when you say things like "low elo shit stain" i know you'll be banned and no one will have to deal with your bad attitude again.

its not "burning flash" they force you to go flash for flash becasue sona can no longer poke after she is missing flash and thats saying they didnt calculate the dive perfectly and both flash at the same time to kill you

because ya know... high elo

you do realize that people dont stay level 1 forever right? you get ONE power chord that will do about 100 damage with full combo then the support just uses his relic shield charges and draven is back up to 100% hp and they hit level 2

ok now what? it just became that much more dangerous to poke again what about level 3? 4?

what about when he DOES back and buy a vamp scepter? the minute he buys vamp scepter it becomes impossible to poke draven out of lane because you will NEVER be able able to poke often enough for the damage to accumulate

best case scenario you will be able to get off some max range q pokes for 50-60 damage but thats easily healed from relic shield/draven vamp

dont even bother trying by the time draven buys bf sword/if he finishs bloodthirster you may as well just go mid and let them take turret before he turret dives and 3 shots you

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20153 votes

Higher than level 1 was not our discussion, you claimed that sona only has a 40 damage poke and that is completely false, and now you are changing the subject away from that because this "low elo shit stain" has proven you wrong. You know as well as i do that her trading pattern is far more than her q and your insistence on ignoring her passive damage along with her aa damage only reinforces my point that you are just being biased in your discussion.

Good day sir.

A Wild AP SonaAug 24, 20156 votes

{quoted}

Higher than level 1 was not our discussion, you claimed that sona only has a 40 damage poke and that is completely false, and now you are changing the subject away from that because this "low elo shit stain" has proven you wrong. You know as well as i do that her trading pattern is far more than her q and your insistence on ignoring her passive damage along with her aa damage only reinforces my point that you are just being biased in your discussion.

Good day sir.

it has nothing to do with being biased

you do realize that vs actual GOOD players you probably will only be able to use your power chord 10-15% of the times you go in to poke? the rest of the time it literally has to be a max range q which does 40-80 so basically next to nothing vs a relic shield/life stealing adc

only in low elo games do people let sona repeatedly walk up to the adc and just aa them and use their power chord whenever its up that sort of thing is instantly punishable vs good players

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20153 votes

Your bias has everything to do with it so long as you are ignoring the largest parts of her damage in her trading potential.

Her passive is up every 3 abilities which even if you do nothing but q is 33% of the time. Saying 10-15% of the time is just lying. You're q damage assessment is still low because it's 40 damage base on two targets + an AP ratio, so you're lying there too.

You don't let it happen, but if the sona's positioning is good and she understands basic trading mechanics the ADC will be csing and won't be able to trade back, or will miss cs. Win win for sona.

Also upvoting your own comments as soon as you upload them is terribly rude, as is the picture flipping me off because you can't actually reason through an argument.

I SAID GOOD DAY SIR!

A Wild AP SonaAug 24, 20156 votes

{quoted}

Your bias has everything to do with it so long as you are ignoring the largest parts of her damage in her trading potential.

Her passive is up every 3 abilities which even if you do nothing but q is 33% of the time. Saying 10-15% of the time is just lying. You're q damage assessment is still low because it's 40 damage base on two targets + an AP ratio, so you're lying there too.

You don't let it happen, but if the sona's positioning is good and she understands basic trading mechanics the ADC will be csing and won't be able to trade back, or will miss cs. Win win for sona.

Also upvoting your own comments as soon as you upload them is terribly rude, as is the picture flipping me off because you can't actually reason through an argument.

40 damage is still nothing and doesnt accumulate what part do you not understand of this?

have you ever heard of relic shield/the cookie jar the support is running around with?

and I say 10-15% of the time because any good adc will punish the living shit out of you if you are repeatedly going within 550 range of him the more you attempt to poke in a short period of time the more telegraphed you become and thus the easier to punish you become

go watch willy wonka and play some high elo sona games so you can actually understand that people dont care about missing minions if it means they get to kill the 300g pinata called sona buvelle thats apparently standing within 550 range of them the entire laning phase

manbearswineAug 23, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Sona wasn't nerfed because of her winrate, she was nerfed because of her oppressive and non-interactive play style. Her win rates were a symptom of that nerf, not the cause.

And how much competitive play did that playstyle get her? How much was she played in high level solo q?

Youd think something so oppresive and non interactive would be considered strong,but no,that wasn't the case,she was still very easy to deal with if you just familiarized yourself with the matchup,she was nerfed purely over her winrate.

AMYS GRAVEAug 23, 20154 votes

Amount of competitive play does not equate to health in game. Non-interactive does not mean OP. Neither of those are things that i said. If you would think about her kit and stop strawman-ing other peoples arguments you might learn something.

manbearswineAug 23, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Amount of competitive play does not equate to health in game.

Tell that to rengar,or did you forget that some of the most toxic champions are also some of the strongest?

Non-interactive does not mean OP.

And buzz-words should not be senselessly spammed.

Non-interactive is old fiddle,who would constantly throw e at you,and you are silenced so you can't retaliate,and it constantly shoves the lane in,and if you somehow manage to get a decent engage he just fears you,that's non-interactive.

Non-interactive is current soraka(who is also considered stronger than sona),as she just spams her heal at a safe distance for her carry,then spams pots/throws q at you from a mile away,that's non-ineractive.

Non-interactive is NOT an immobile squishy who has no way to defend herself and needs to go into aa range to poke you.

Neither of those are things that i said. If you would think about her kit and stop strawman-ing other peoples arguments you might learn something.

Says the cluess scrub spamming buzzwords,doesn't the winrate demand sacrfice or something? Don't you have a cult meeting to attend?

AMYS GRAVEAug 23, 20154 votes

Tell that to rengar,or did you forget that some of the most toxic champions are also some of the strongest?

Tell that to yorrick and poppy. Your focus on one end of the spectrum doesn't mean that the other end doesn't exist. Some of the most toxic champions in the game are also some of the weakest. Health of kit does not equate to strength.

And buzz-words should not be senselessly spammed.

Not spamming if I'm using them correctly, and i am.

Non-interactive is old fiddle,who would constantly throw e at you,and you are silenced so you can't retaliate,and it constantly shoves the lane in,and if you somehow manage to get a decent engage he just fears you,that's non-interactive.

That's a good example.

Non-interactive is current soraka(who is also considered stronger than sona),as she just spams her heal at a safe distance for her carry,then spams pots/throws q at you from a mile away,that's non-ineractive.

Soraka (and sona) are very vulnerable to all in engage supports. Soraka more so because it costs her her HP in order to heal effectively, making her vulnerable.

Non-interactive is NOT an immobile squishy who has no way to defend herself and needs to go into aa range to poke you.

As a ranged champ, i don't think going into AA range in order to trade is anything to whine about, and as for defense she has a heal, a shield, a MS boost, and if necessary an ult to disengage with in order to get out of trouble. She is hardly defenseless.

Says the cluess scrub spamming buzzwords,doesn't the winrate demand sacrfice or something? Don't you have a cult meeting to attend?

If you're going to jab at my intellect for elucidating the common acumen regarding Sona's onerous influence over lane then i think our arguments have reached their conclusion. My apologies for being more literate in game design and hope that you too can one day be qualified to understand these terms in their fullest possible meanings. If you don't want to discuss champion health in a well founded understanding then your arguments carry no weight.

I bid you adieu good sir.

manbearswineAug 23, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Tell that to yorrick and poppy. Your focus on one end of the spectrum doesn't mean that the other end doesn't exist. Some of the most toxic champions in the game are also some of the weakest. Health of kit does not equate to strength.

It's proof riot doesn't care too much for it,and they don't,you also have plenty of healthy champions on the shit end of the spectrum,and plenty more obnoxious ones on the strong side.

Not spamming if I'm using them correctly, and i am.

Nope.

That's a good example.

Soraka (and sona) are very vulnerable to all in engage supports. Soraka more so because it costs her her HP in order to heal effectively, making her vulnerable.

No,soraka isn't more so because her spells have a(much) larger range and she just hides behind her adc and heals him,and that guy tends to have an escape.

Her heal has a health cost,sonas heal has a mana cost,ironically the cost for sonas heal is higher.

As a ranged champ, i don't think going into AA range in order to trade is anything to whine about, and as for defense she has a heal, a shield, a MS boost, and if necessary an ult to disengage with in order to get out of trouble. She is hardly defenseless.

A minor heal,a minor shield a minor ms boost,and an ult with a massive cooldown she gets on level 6. Hell if aa range isn't risky for you,then every single ranged champion in this game is non interactive,adcs are non interactive,orianna non interactive,nami non interactive.

If you're going to jab at my intellect for elucidating the common acumen regarding Sona's onerous influence over lane then i think our arguments have reached their conclusion. My apologies for being more literate in game design and hope that you too can one day be qualified to understand these terms in their fullest possible meanings. If you don't want to discuss champion health in a well founded understanding then your arguments carry no weight.

I bid you adieu good sir.

Let's use sophisticated words to try and and turn attention away from how clueless you are as to how bot lane works,to someone for whom english is not the native language as a bonus,good for you.

"Soraka more interactive than sona",rofl,how about you play a few games against cancer goat and tell me that again.

AMYS GRAVEAug 23, 20154 votes

It's proof riot doesn't care too much for it,and they don't,you also have plenty of healthy champions on the shit end of the spectrum,and plenty more obnoxious ones on the strong side.

Exactly, there are champs at both ends of the spectrum, so you're equating non-interactive with OP is a strawman argument. I'm glad you agree that your argument was flawed.

Hell if aa range isn't risky for you,then every single ranged champion in this game is non interactive,adcs are non interactive,orianna non interactive,nami non interactive.

There's the straw man again poking his head out again.

Let's use sophisticated words

I'm just pointing out that you're criticism over my using words to discuss balance in a meaningful way is not a fair criticism. It is the only fair and meaningful way to discuss balance, instead of refering to champions as

cancer goat

and calling that an argument.

Also FYI a non-naitive English speaker here, that doesn't mean you can't learn it and speak eloquently. You're really just getting angry so i'll try this again.

I bid you adieu good sir.

manbearswineAug 24, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Exactly, there are champs at both ends of the spectrum, so you're equating non-interactive with OP is a strawman argument. I'm glad you agree that your argument was flawed.

You said that she shouldn't be strong because she's non-interactive(which is again just false),and I referred to that by showing that riot cares very little for game health,no reason for sona to be weak when rengar is strong.

There's the straw man again poking his head out again.

Is that your new buzz-word now? You claimed sona is non-interactive because her 550 range is apparently very hard to retaliate against,even though she is immobile paper,that places the vast majority of the champion pool in the same category.

I'm just pointing out that you're criticism over my using words to discuss balance in a meaningful way is not a fair criticism. It is the only fair and meaningful way to discuss balance, instead of refering to champions as

Of course it's fair,you just spam buzz-words in places where they have nothing to do with them,sona is as interactive as most supports,nami has more or less the same poke pattern,alongside a speed-boost of the same strength,and her heal making her harder to burst down.

and calling that an argument.

This is exactly the problem,this is a perfectly fine argument any support player will understand(go ahead,ask people who actually play bot lane how fun they find soraka to play against),anyone who actually plays bot lane is aware of how obnoxious soraka is,but you almost never actually play bot lane,you keep arguing theories based on your limited understanding of bot lane,I tell you how matchups actually play out.

Also FYI a non-naitive English speaker here, that doesn't mean you can't learn it and speak eloquently.

Well,there might be sense in that if you are from NA,otherwise there are better investments of time out there. Would be still better than this though,so you got me there.

You're really just getting angry so i'll try this again.

Trying to speak sense into people who are completely clueless tends to do that to me,though I'm much more frustrated at how arrogant people here are than anything else,or you specifically being that way.

I bid you adieu good sir.

Yeah,you are right,I think we are done here.

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20154 votes

You said that she shouldn't be strong because she's non-interactive(which is again just false),and I referred to that by showing that riot cares very little for game health,no reason for sona to be weak when rengar is strong.

I never said she shouldn't be strong, the straw man pokes his head out again.

Is that your new buzz-word now? You claimed sona is non-interactive because her 550 range is apparently very hard to retaliate against,even though she is immobile paper,that places the vast majority of the champion pool in the same category.

It's the only kind of argument you know how to make, so straw man fits.

Of course it's fair,you just spam buzz-words in places where they have nothing to do with them,sona is as interactive as most supports,nami has more or less the same poke pattern,alongside a speed-boost of the same strength,and her heal making her harder to burst down.

Yeah, Nami has problems too, but that's an argument about Nami's kit not Sonas. Sonas kit is still non-interactive.

This is exactly the problem,this is a perfectly fine argument any support player will understand(go ahead,ask people who actually play bot lane how fun they find soraka to play against),anyone who actually plays bot lane is aware of how obnoxious soraka is,but you almost never actually play bot lane,you keep arguing theories based on your limited understanding of bot lane,I tell you how matchups actually play out.

An argument about the interactivity of Soraka's kit isn't an argument about the interactivity of Sona's kit. Sona's kit is still non-interactive.

Well,there might be sense in that if you are from NA,otherwise there are better investments of time out there. Would be still better than this though,so you got me there.

This isn't an English problem anyway, it's a logic problem. You don't understand the basics of forming an argument.

Trying to speak sense into people who are completely clueless tends to do that to me,though I'm much more frustrated at how arrogant people here are than anything else,or you specifically being that way.

Yeah,you are right,I think we are done here.

I'd love to talk some sense into you, but you insist on fallacy after fallacy. I would also love to be done here but if you keep acting like you have an argument when you have none. I think you perceive others as arrogant because you get frustrated at your own inability to form an argument without fallacies.

manbearswineAug 24, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I never said she shouldn't be strong, the straw man pokes his head out again.

"Sona wasn't nerfed because of her winrate, she was nerfed because of her oppressive and non-interactive play style. Her win rates were a symptom of that nerf, not the cause. "

So she can be strong,being non-interactive/unhealthy is fine(as we have established earlier),so why would she be nerfed to shit tier(This is where high elo see sona in,and riot has acknowledged the fact she is seen that way by them)?

It's the only kind of argument you know how to make, so straw man fits.

It's still better than whatever it is you are doing,either you can't keep track over this conversation,or you are just making random statements then getting angry that I assume you are actually trying to make a point with them.

Why would you claim sona is non-interactive if that's not a reason to justify her current state? Why would you say she is not healthy if it's fine for unhealthy champions to be strong?

Yeah, Nami has problems too, but that's an argument about Nami's kit not Sonas. Sonas kit is still non-interactive.

So who doesn't have problems? Can you rate the following supports by how healthy you think them to be overall,and how interactive they are: zyra,sona,velkoz,blitz,leona,soraka,thresh,nami,janna,lulu.

Otherwise it just seems you are calling everything non-interactive.

An argument about the interactivity of Soraka's kit isn't an argument about the interactivity of Sona's kit. Sona's kit is still non-interactive.

Except the whole point of that was that soraka is both less interactive than sona(which she very much is,as she actually is non-interactive) and allowed to be stronger(which she once again is).

This isn't an English problem anyway, it's a logic problem. You don't understand the basics of forming an argument.

You're not even trying to make an argument,you are claiming to make random statements at this point.

I'd love to talk some sense into you, but you insist on fallacy after fallacy. I would also love to be done here but if you keep acting like you have an argument when you have none. I think you perceive others as arrogant because you get frustrated at your own inability to form an argument without fallacies.

You just call regular reasoning a fallacy,one claim is based on another,you claim sona was nerfed because she isn't interactive,I claim soraka is even more non-interactive and allowed to be stronger,you claim soraka is interactive,I insist that she isn't and you can easily confirm that with others,you lose track of the connection to the original statement,I don't.

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20154 votes

So she can be strong,being non-interactive/unhealthy is fine

I never said she was fine, i said she was non-interactive. That is all we have established. By saying i have acknowledged anything else is the heart of the straw man argument you keep making.

A discussion rating every support and their power along with discussions on the interactivity of their kit is better suited for another thread, and we have gotten pretty far off topic already.

I am not making random statements, i am staying on discussion. we are talking about sona, stay on topic.

Straw man is a fallacy that you have made over and over in this thread. It is not sound reasoning. You desperately try to change the subject to other supports because you know you have lost the argument, and that is the end of the discussion.

manbearswineAug 24, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I never said she was fine,

I didn't say you said she was fine either,I said you claimed being non-interactive and/or unhealthy is fine.

i said she was non-interactive. That is all we have established.

Oh please,with your ability to keep track of what you are saying this probably already disestablished itself.

A discussion rating every support and their power along with discussions on the interactivity of their kit is better suited for another thread, and we have gotten pretty far off topic already.

This is very much on topic,do I really need to explain why making statements about champions in a vacuum is completely senseless? You want to say sona is non-interactive,then other supports need to be interactive for that statement to be worth making,otherwise you are just throwing random pointless statements.

I am not making random statements, i am staying on discussion. we are talking about sona, stay on topic.

Oh please,you can't follow your own reasoning,you completely forgot where you are going with your arguments,you tried saying sona was unhealthy and was nerfed due to that,realized unhealthy champions are allowed to be strong,forgot what you were talking about,decided that obnoxious champions being strong somehow supports a point you never tried to make,and this is just one example of the nonsense you've been constantly pulling here.

Straw man is a fallacy that you have made over and over in this thread. It is not sound reasoning. You desperately try to change the subject to other supports because you know you have lost the argument, and that is the end of the discussion.

No,unlike other people I realize talking about champions in a vacuum is idiotic,they have to be compared to other champions for an argument to be made,if you can't see that that's just you being clueless,not me doing a strawman,which is actually what you're constantly doing by the fact you can't even remember the point you were trying to get across,and now just jump from one random statement to another.

AMYS GRAVEAug 24, 20154 votes

I never said that her being non-interactive is fine. You are putting words in my mouth over and over. Straw man after straw man.

If you are talking about the strength of a champion in a vacuum of course that's dumb, but that's not the discussion at hand.

Peace out.

manbearswineAug 25, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I never said that her being non-interactive is fine. You are putting words in my mouth over and over. Straw man after straw man.

No,you just can't keep track over your own arguments,you yourself stated that unhealthy champions are spread in strength just as much as healthy ones,and agreed health was no factor in balancing,which goes completely against your claim she was nerfed over her supposedly unhealthy(non interactive as you claimed it to be) gameplay.

pay attention to what you yourself say,the only strawman here is created by you not knowing what you are even trying to say anymore,jumping randomly from statement to another.

If you are talking about the strength of a champion in a vacuum of course that's dumb, but that's not the discussion at hand. Peace out.

Not strength(good for you talking about strawman while making one yourself),but inter-activeness/gamehealth,pay attention to the discussion,maybe that will cause you to stop having hallucinations of men made of straws.

SlaktarTaskenAug 22, 20155 votes

She already got buffed, her E radius is now massive and practically impossible to miss.

Can't remember which Rioter who polled her playerbase for buffs? What did he say?: Bigger radius or lower manacost on E but NOT both? They made their choice and she's in a good spot now so can you lux mains lay the duck off? You already got your goddamn buff, please shut the duck up.

"But muh skillshotz, but muh cooldownz, mut muh manacöztz, but muh waifu, but muh have muh m'probs vs Assassinoz"

No sh*t ratbrains she is intended to have weaknesses, that is, being ease to destroy if you manage to get a hold of her. Which is pretty damn hard if she is any competent at all.

Blah.

Nameless VoiceAug 22, 20151 votes

Why would the player behaviour team be polling players on balance issues?

AmelieAug 22, 20154 votes

Q costing 20 less mana at rank 5 isn't going to change anything. Q doing full damage/duration to the 2nd target also does next to nothing. She may be able to do more sneaky snares for her combo, but Q is not her main damage source. The changes are nice and all, no negative effect, but it's not going to change her mana problems or overall playstyle in any way.

manbearswineAug 22, 20154 votes

{quoted}

Q costing 20 less mana at rank 5 isn't going to change anything.

She has mana issues,20 less mana on a spell is decent.

Q doing full damage/duration to the 2nd target also does next to nothing.

Nope,this one is definitely strong,now you need to hide behind two creeps,which is a lot more restricting.

She may be able to do more sneaky snares for her combo, but Q is not her main damage source. The changes are nice and all, no negative effect, but it's not going to change her mana problems or overall playstyle in any way.

It's gonna help with her mana issues and it's gonna make her stronger in some aspects,I'm not saying that this is a bad change or isn't deserved,but I am saying that this goes very much against their winrate balancing.

The FastAug 22, 20153 votes

What he means is, you usually max Lucent Singularity, and not light binding. By the time Lux has this spell at rank 5, her mana issues are already heavily reduced.

AmelieAug 22, 20152 votes

Exactly. 20 mana that late in the game is negligible.

BakedLotionAug 24, 20151 votes

{quoted}

She has mana issues,20 less mana on a spell is decent.

Nope,this one is definitely strong,now you need to hide behind two creeps,which is a lot more restricting.

It's gonna help with her mana issues and it's gonna make her stronger in some aspects,I'm not saying that this is a bad change or isn't deserved,but I am saying that this goes very much against their winrate balancing.

Actually the snare duration is staying the same. Only the damage is changed. Light Binding [Q] - Mana cost lowered to 50/55/60/65/70 (down from 50/60/70/80/90) and damage against 2nd target increased to 100% (up from 50%) ^Thats what RoG is saying but surr20 is saying its the bind too, so idk. Either way it doesn't make her op

manbearswineAug 24, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Actually the snare duration is staying the same. Only the damage is changed. Light Binding [Q] - Mana cost lowered to 50/55/60/65/70 (down from 50/60/70/80/90) and damage against 2nd target increased to 100% (up from 50%) ^Thats what RoG is saying but surr20 is saying its the bind too, so idk.

Kind of a big difference here,will have to wait and see which one it is.

Either way it doesn't make her op

Nobody said it's gonna make her op,why does nobody bother reading more than one line of each post?

IcyPepperAug 22, 20152 votes

raises hand

How would we nerf Thresh exactly? Nerfing for the sake of nerfing isn't always a good idea, so how would we go about nerfing him then?

manbearswineAug 22, 20152 votes

{quoted}

raises hand

How would we nerf Thresh exactly? Nerfing for the sake of nerfing isn't always a good idea, so how would we go about nerfing him then?

There are like 70 different options:

Increase hook mana cost(maybe only in the lower levels,possibly make it refund some mana when hitting a champion):right now thresh's hook puts a lot of pressure on his opponents,but him being ranged there's not much room to punish him for missing it,so making it more costly is an option.

increase e cd to 13/12/11/10/9 from 9: the low cd on e allow him to spam this incredibly strong ability,especially in the lower levels there's really no reason for this,as often it will come up twice in a fight.

reduce base ms 325 from 335: his hook range is large,and he is tanky,and ranged,and has a lot of cc to peel for himself,naut is in this state,so can thresh be.

His w currently can used to reveal areas,there's no reason for this on a tank who is already very safe,it can be removed.

W range/mechanics-let's face it,thresh is a kill lane support,he really doesn't need a mechanic to help him save allies,it doesn't really fit thematically on him,so options:

heavily reduce the max range of his lantern.
allies cannot used the lantern if they were damaged by enemy champions in the past 3 seconds-this way offensive uses will still be strong,but it's no longer a get out of jail free card.

R-okay for a guy with so much lockdown and threat,why does he need a disengage? Right now thresh can be "baited",he goes in,throws his ult,realizes it's a bait and backs off due to the fact his ult disengages and locks down at the same time,it's stupid,force him to commit. Make it work like a reverse righteous glory,the slow doesn't apply if you are moving towards enemy champions.

Another strange part about thresh is that he is a ranged...tank...make him melee,buff his stats to compensate.

Obviously not all together,and there are plenty more options out there.

M Dragon14Aug 23, 20151 votes

I would do small nerfs. Like, remove the shield on his lantern, and maybe mana costs. Really, its not that he has any ability thats op on its own, its just he has a little of everything. Kinda like sona, but better.

manbearswineAug 23, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I would do small nerfs. Like, remove the shield on his lantern, and maybe mana costs. Really, its not that he has any ability thats op on its own, its just he has a little of everything. Kinda like sona, but better.

No,not all.

Sona's ult is very strong,but that's it.

Thresh's ult is insane,that would be fine on it's own,if his q wasn't so insanely strong itself,which could be tolerable if his w wasn't so fucking strong,and his e being very strong doesn't help either,on top of being a ranged tank.

yes you can nerf him through stats,but that's bad for the most part,he needs to lose capabilities,he doesn't have a little bit of anything,he has a shit ton of every possible thing.