Boards›Gameplay

Talon is the healthiest Assassin in the game

DoFr··101 votes·8,029 views

when you hear the word Assassin, what's the First thing comes to mind? it's High Risk, High Reward.

reason why i think Talon is the healthiest because..

1- all of his abilities scales off Bonus AD, and they're quite high, which is needed in an assassin. 2- Talon's escape is determined by his success on his Assassination, if he could go into a teamfight and burst the AD/AP carry, then he has the chance to run away from the scene and comback after his cooldowns to round up the cleanup 3- Talon's performs wonderfully with skill-oriented players, using his Cutthroat as a counter to a skillshot, and making a counter harass is the most satisfying thing ever 4- he has a huge single target burst thanks to his damage modifier, and a good amount of AoE spells for teamfights

1- Talons Early Lane phase is bad, and his addiction to Flasks removes/Limits his Early damage (because he Scales off Bonus AD) 2- Talon's W Range is short, and is easily predictable (and you can only be hit with 1 Rake anyways) 3- his Mana Costs are high especially if he Tries to keep up with the other midlaners harass, and thus his bar drops quite fast 4- you can counter Talon by having the Turret's Range's line exactly on your back, so his cutthroat is rendered as a Punishment (for inexperienced Talons atleast)

now as you see you have a clear chance to put Talon under control, by being Cautious and see how he positions himself

despite it all, i still don't see where his passive fit, it's a conditional AA buff, that doesn't buff his own Q and Sheen (for obvious reasons)

instead he could be having a passive that helps him sustain in a lane you barely AA as Talon in a burst/Teamfight so why not make it a Defensive passive? OR at the very least, make his passive grants him Bonus AD, his Flask addiction is ruining him!

a small Edit

buying a Pinkward is Lethal against Talon, mainly after his Burst you will find Talon just randomly walking by, because you know, that's his only way of actually leaving, walking. (an assassin, that simply walk? wow, right?) you have only need to place a pink, and stun him, all of his spells would be either on cooldown, or really short on range. and no, you won't die if Talon Tried to burst you (implying your health is 100-80%), Talon CANNOT 100-0 you if BOTH of you are in Equal level and Equal amount of Farm. do try to play Talon before you judge please, i'm not looking for a blind feedback

199 Comments

DrCyanide68 votes

{quoted}

when you hear the word Assassin, what's the First thing comes to mind? it's High Risk, High Reward.

Clearly you must be talking about a different type of Assassin. In League of Legends, Assassin means "Incredibly Safe, Incredible Damage".

Fauxfire2 votes

Not if you have no CC, no resistance, and only your base health...

asssassin hater.

A Slime Appears41 votes

The best cc is death, and assassins are the best at it.

I Main Swain1 votes

every single assassin has cc of some kind, even if its just a slow

Syn Zykan10 votes

Assassins without any cc Katarina MasterYi Nidalee Fiora

TonyTonyMordecai2 votes

Can I just ask why Riven, a Fighter/Assassin (could be the other way around, correct me if it is), has a knockup, an AOE stun (scaling off AD), a dash that gives a shield (which also scales off AD), and then an ultimate that has a ton of range compared to other assassin's ultimates that either keep them in one place, or stops some of their damage output? (Yes, I know LB has her 2 (or 4, if you count the blinking back part) jumps and her mark and her snare/slow, but LB should be getting some number/scaling nerfs soon, right?) Riven has 3 CC abilities! Why would an assassin have that in their kit?! (correct me on anything if I'm wrong, please)

ApplyForAGrant4 votes

Sarcasms aside, while Talon doesn't have the disengage potential as Zed, he brings in a lot more AoE damage so that after his initial combo the entire enemy team is usually too low to fight anyways, so its not as risky as what its commonly believed to be.

Junkο3 votes

Talon is literally 100-0 somebody before they can react or get killed if they survive your combo.

Thryale2 votes

imo that is what assassin's are all about. Assassins aren't about flashy plays and extended engages. They are about getting in, slitting everyone's throats, and walking home.

Honestly, the only thing that differentiates an assassin from an executioner (personal classification give champs like veigar) is the ability to jump in to kill their target instead of being immobile.

Mecha MaIphite19 votes

When you go too ham as talon you are usually deleted in about half a second.

forist30 votes

Actually talon is just the weakest assassin you play mid lane, that's why he's perceived as the healthiest. You can dress his capabilities up all you want, but in the end, his weak laning phase and limited resources are what people consider to be healthy, and that is not how most assassins work. Most assassin's punish people in 1v1's, talon simply needs to survive until he can roam. Sure, he can win lane and get ahead, but really that's completely dependent on his opponent, ie: if they fuck up and make a mistake you can capitalize, but if they play their champ correctly 8/10 times they will out-damage and out-trade you. Like I said he's good at punishing mistakes, but most people want champs who can make plays, and not champs who capitalize on their opponents. Most players want to feel like they're in control of the game, so they don't actually play talon. That's why he could use some extra utility on either his passive or his cut-throat, so that you can initiate favorable trades/fights instead of waiting for your opponent to.

DoFr7 votes

[{quoted}](name=i am theboxghost,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=NkvEEE0B,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2015-02-23T21:14:40.270+0000)

Actually talon is just the weakest assassin you play mid lane, that's why he's perceived as the healthiest. You can dress his capabilities up all you want, but in the end, his weak laning phase and limited resources are what people consider to be healthy, and that is not how most assassins work. Most assassin's punish people in 1v1's, talon simply needs to survive until he can roam. Sure, he can win lane and get ahead, but really that's completely dependent on his opponent, ie: if they fuck up and make a mistake you can capitalize, but if they play their champ correctly 8/10 times they will out-damage and out-trade you. Like I said he's good at punishing mistakes, but most people want champs who can make plays, and not champs who capitalize on their opponents. Most players want to feel like they're in control of the game, so they don't actually play talon. That's why he could use some extra utility on either his passive or his cut-throat, so that you can initiate favorable trades/fights instead of waiting for your opponent to.

i agree so much with you, have my vote.

Chromatic Eagle6 votes

Isn't that how Assassins are supposed to be? Riot moved away from that with all of this mobility.

Kuroi863 votes

The point is Talon can't punish someone in a 1v1 until he has a lead on them. The only class that should be nearly as dangerous in a 1v1 is the fighter/bruiser class and that's only in the most skilled of hands. About any other class against assassins should be more focused on surviving lane and csing while waiting for the mid game to roll around and doing all they can to punish the assassin for any roaming they do with pings and tower pushing.

SmokinSickStyle17 votes

Meh, it sounds to me that you think he's healthy only because he's possibly the weakest among all assassins, mostly because he's one of the oldest and he doesn't have the mobility spells that most assassins\champs have nowadays.

Actually he's one of the least healthy when it comes to burst patterns, he has 2.5s faster burst than Zed if we are comparing traditional AD assassins mid.

He's outclassed because Riot thinks is right to give him mana where he cannot spam because of decent high CD meanwhile we have Riven and Kata who are resourceless.

Also, RAKE HITS TWICE, to take the full damage rake HAS to hit twice.

I dunno you, but the only way to prevent me bursting a squishy champ mid as soon as i complete my brutalizer and i am 6 with all summoners up is a big chunk of stacked armor.

He doesn't have high mana costs, he has low mana pool + regen.

Release Talon has such huge mana regen that he barely ran out of it, and they nerfed it obviously.

Talon doesn't have a true escape (PLEASE STOP SAYING HIS ULT COUNTS FOR FF SAKE, it's his damage tool) because as i said he's part of old gen go balls deep AD assassins.

Your 4th point should "For inexperienced careless towerdivers" wiithout including Talon as no experienced player will ever use E underturret if he's inexperienced with Talon.

If Talon as a healthy burst pattern (Less than 1 s to kill you.) i dun really know what to say to you lol.

Oh and i say this because i play Talon and i know what he's capable of and no Assassin can be considered healthy seeing how our community cries because an Assassin assassinates, that's their nature.

Like before the silence nerf, Zed goes out of favor, pro plays Talon, he gets his silence removed and now Zed is cried about again.

Did you even play him?

Auz the Ripper16 votes

Talon's healthy because he's not safe

sure ideally he can kill a squishy in 2 seconds flat but if he gets interrupted, he's totally screwed, he has no "get put of jail free" cards like Zed or LB.

on a micro level his burst is a bit unhealthy, sure; but on a macro level, talon is very healthy He can punish his opponent's mistakes hard and his mistakes can punished equally hard, Like an assassin should be

zerxy04 votes

Yeah, you word it perfectly well. I play talon a lot, and I can tell you; you either finish ur mission or get caught and die...

SmokingPuffin11 votes

Talon is nowhere close to healthiest assassin.

  1. Talon's damage combo happens in the blink of an eye.
  2. Counterplay against Talon is largely "don't stand in E range". He does have pretty good counterplay in the case where he didn't kill you, but that's more about Talon overestimating his threat than you making any sort of play.
  3. Talon is feast or famine; an ahead Talon is too strong, a behind Talon is too weak.

Remember that "healthy" is not a power level term. It's about a champion creating good or bad gameplay for everyone in the game. For example, Ahri is a pretty healthy champion. Even when she's OP, you still have good counterplay options -- juke her Q and E, force out her R, anticipate her jump destination and land CC, and so on. A 60% win rate Ahri is not something you want to play against, for sure, but it won't make you hate life half as much as a 60% win rate Talon.

forist4 votes

Gonna have to disagree with that, ahri is single-handedly the most overbearing laner in the game atm. Assassin's should not have that combination of mobility and range. Its much less of a head-ache playing against talon who has cut- and-dry weaknesses, while ahri has no real ones. I absolutely can't stand how low her margin of error is, with these recent buffs she doesn't even need to land skillshots to destroy squishies, just r w r r w and throw out a q for the move-speed, doesn't even have to land really, but if it does then massive damage on top of your other spells.

SmokingPuffin9 votes

You are way too focused on current power level. Ahri feels more overbearing because she's borderline OP. Talon feels healthy because he sucks.

It's like Abe Lincoln said: "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." Who knew that he was so good at champion design?

Teridax684 votes

I agree, and I feel relative power tends to get confused with design flaws a lot over here (and sometimes design flaws are treated like balance problems in the case of champions like LeeSin). Nobody talked about Zed before the massive changes to mana regen, especially to item 3028 , and now that every mana champion struggles more in the early game while Zed can still poke pretty comfortably, he feels unfair to play against because he doesn't pay as big a price for his ability use than most other mid laners, despite his core harass and assassination playstyle not having changed at all. I do feel Ahri has a bit too much free mobility (I'd rather her Q gave her a movement speed boost only if it hit a champion, even if the resulting boost were made a lot stronger), but overall she's in really good shape.

SmokingPuffin4 votes

{quoted}

Nobody talked about Zed before the massive changes to mana regen, especially to item 3028 , and now that every mana champion struggles more in the early game while Zed can still poke pretty comfortably, he feels unfair to play against because he doesn't pay as big a price for his ability use than most other mid laners, despite his core harass and assassination playstyle not having changed at all.

Good take.

I do feel Ahri has a bit too much free mobility (I'd rather her Q gave her a movement speed boost only if it hit a champion, even if the resulting boost were made a lot stronger), but overall she's in really good shape.

I don't think Ahri Q giving MS on hit ends up working out. Ahri is a kitey character -- she's going to throw the Q and then move away. If she gets the MS on hit, she'll be 1000 range from the target before it happens. That's going to feel pretty irrelevant a lot of the time.

That mechanic is much more interesting on a chasing champion.

Teridax681 votes

At the same time, Ahri gets to move 1000+ range away from people chasing her precisely because of her movement speed boost -- if anything, it would be easier for her to hit them while kiting them than while chasing them, since they'd be running towards her and her orb -- but right now she gets a ton of free mobility even if she completely misses her target. Right now, Ahri can throw her orb in any direction just so that she can run away faster, and I don't think that feels quite right. She's most interesting when she's moving to reposition her orb and killing her opponents as she's running away or alongside them, so she should be rewarded for staying cool and remaining accurate while getting kited. I think it's possible to give her the same amount of kiting power and still make the movespeed bonus more restricted, if only by making the bonus a lot stronger when it lands, and I think it might also solve the issue of Ahri feeling overly difficult to hit in lane.

SmokingPuffin2 votes

At the same time, Ahri gets to move 1000+ range away from people chasing her precisely because of her movement speed boost

Not really. People didn't usually react to Old Ahri throwing Q at them by running towards her. Disengage is pretty much baked into Ahri Q.

I think the Q buff is largely about repositioning, and I don't think the on hit version works well with that objective.

Right now, Ahri can throw her orb in any direction just so that she can run away faster, and I don't think that feels quite right.

Seems true.

She's most interesting when she's moving to reposition her orb and killing her opponents as she's running away or alongside them, so she should be rewarded for staying cool and remaining accurate while getting kited.

I think on cast movement speed is way better for orb manipulation than on hit. More predictable and cleaner play patterns for both Ahri and the target.

I think it's possible to give her the same amount of kiting power and still make the movespeed bonus more restricted, if only by making the bonus a lot stronger when it lands

I think that's a really bad idea. Getting the same amount of power out of the less reliable MS boost is going to require a huge booster. Like, she'd need Lulu W on hit to be as good as the current button on cast, maybe even more. That's going to expose us to all kinds of game health risk.

Teridax682 votes

{quoted}

I think on cast movement speed is way better for orb manipulation than on hit. More predictable and cleaner play patterns for both Ahri and the target.

The play pattern for Ahri's target (dodge the orb) and for Ahri herself (land the orb) would remain the same, so I disagree. The likeliest change would be that Ahri would benefit slightly more from landing her abilities up close than at max range, for a longer window of orb manipulation, and I think that would actually be healthier overall, since right now Ahri players are generally encouraged to land max-range Qs for instant burst. If anything, this change would make for cleaner and more predictable play patterns, because her utility would no longer be dissociated from her damage.

{quoted}

I think that's a really bad idea. Getting the same amount of power out of the less reliable MS boost is going to require a huge booster. Like, she'd need Lulu W on hit to be as good as the current button on cast, maybe even more. That's going to expose us to all kinds of game health risk.

Is it really that bad? I mean, suppose we keep the same bonus and restrict it: would Ahri need more mobility then, and if so, how much more? This isn't about giving Ahri a pseudo-flash on Q or something, it's about tying her mobility in better to her nuke. Simply removing the decay would make the movespeed bonus a lot more powerful, without necessarily making her too strong. You're also jumping to conclusions here, as if Ahri would need to be broken OP just so that she could survive a more restrictive movement speed boost, when even just making that change without buffing her movement speed would likely still leave her as a very successful champion.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

this change would make for cleaner and more predictable play patterns, because her utility would no longer be dissociated from her damage.

The less predictable part ought to be obvious. Precisely when the MS boost will activate is dependent on the opponent's movement, and the opponent doesn't know when the Q will be cast. Trying to predict exactly where Ahri will be, even if we assume that she will keep moving in her current direction, is more challenging. As a result, both sides are guessing more than they are currently guessing.

On the cleaner front, Ahri's play pattern no longer has a clear optimization case. Previously, Ahri wanted to land max range Q, and the opponent wanted to avoid max range Q. Now, Ahri gets unclear value from many ranges of landed Q. The opponent no longer has a clear idea of where to position relative to Ahri. Unclear optimization leads to muddled gameplay; strategy games work better when goal states are clear.

Is it really that bad? I mean, suppose we keep the same bonus and restrict it: would Ahri need more mobility then, and if so, how much more?

  • Ahri can miss
  • Ahri now must react to when the MS buff is triggered; harder to plan routes for the ball
  • The MS buff occurs later. In particular, if two mids attempt to trade skillshots and shoot at the same time, MS on hit is pretty useless for Ahri, when on cast it is very valuable.

All in all, X% MS on cast is obviously a lot better than X% MS on hit. It would need to be 2X% or even 3X% on hit to have an equal contribution to power budget. Making it such a high number will inevitably expose you to edge cases you don't want to design around.

Now, if your goal is to nerf Ahri, you ought to just come out and say that. No need to beat around the bush. If the plan is to keep her around the same power level, this change is not healthy.

Teridax681 votes

{quoted}

On the cleaner front, Ahri's play pattern no longer has a clear optimization case. Previously, Ahri wanted to land max range Q, and the opponent wanted to avoid max range Q. Now, Ahri gets unclear value from many ranges of landed Q. The opponent no longer has a clear idea of where to position relative to Ahri. Unclear optimization leads to muddled gameplay; strategy games work better when goal states are clear.

The reason a max-range Q is optimal is because it gives Ahri's opponent the shortest window to avoid both applications of damage. It is not optimal in the sense that Ahri something out of it that she couldn't otherwise. There are different ways of tying her mobility to her damage (you could have it apply on the first instance of damage dealt with her Q on a champion, and perhaps refresh it on a second application, for example), but ultimately doing so would still allow Ahri to use her movement speed boost to readjust her orb as she can now, assuming her orb has enough time to readjust. Max-range Qs would still give her a movement speed buff, so there's no loss in optimization. Ideally, though, her optimal Q use shouldn't be its max-range use, but rather the use of it at close to middle ranges while repositioning mid-fight, which I think can be encouraged using her mobility.

{quoted}

Now, if your goal is to nerf Ahri, you ought to just come out and say that. No need to beat around the bush. If the plan is to keep her around the same power level, this change is not healthy.

The intent here is not to nerf Ahri in a general sense, and I don't think anyone genuinely interested in a champion takes a look at them and says "make them less powerful, doesn't matter how", or "let's buff this champion without discussing where they need buffs". I don't think the mobility on Ahri's Q should be unconditional, and so if something is getting nerfed, it's her freedom of movement using that ability, which ultimately is a nerf to her mobility by itself. If there is a way to rebalance the ability so that Ahri keeps the same amount of mobility and remains healthy, then that would be fine, and if she ends up being too weak, it would help to understand what she's specifically lacking (besides free movement, which I don't think is entirely healthy). While I don't have all the statistics in hand, a cursory look at Ahri's pick and win rates says she's pretty successful, so she'd be able to take a nerf like this fairly well. She also received mana cost nerfs recently, which could easily be mitigated or reverted in case she falls too low.

Again, you are following the reasoning that Ahri must have unhealthily strong mobility to remain viable, and that any buff to her raw movement speed bonus would break her, neither of which I agree with. Ahri would not have had additional mobility on her Q in the first place if it didn't have balancing levers to adjust its strength.

{quoted}

The MS buff occurs later. In particular, if two mids attempt to trade skillshots and shoot at the same time, MS on hit is pretty useless for Ahri, when on cast it is very valuable.

This is one of the reasons why I think Ahri needs more restricted mobility on her Q. Unconditional mobility means Ahri can immediately (and quickly) retreat to a safe range once the throws out her Orb of Deception, making it extremely hard to hit her back or even poke her in the first place. While Ahri is meant to be evasive, she is also meant to be at her strongest when at a risky range from her enemies (which is why her Fox-Fires have a short reach and her E makes enemies walk towards her), so her evasion should come into play when she's genuinely in combat with her opponent, and not just poking them from a distance. Ahri is most interesting when she's putting herself at risk and moving around her enemies at calculatedly short distances, so I'd rather place more power there if she needs any than encourage her current max-range Q+run away poke pattern, which also carries the lowest amount of interaction with her opponent. It's this excessive safety that caused the nerfs to her mana costs in Patch 5.3:

"It's safe to say that Ahri's return back to her kitier, mage-ier (that is a word) roots has been a success, but her new-found mobility has left her feeling a tad overbearing. For someone that skirts the edge of fights so well, Ahri wasn't taking enough risk for the reward (less dashing in, more dashing out). Forcing this fox-girl to walk the line for her guaranteed damage makes expert use of her Orb-speed and Charm, which is where we'd like to leave her feeling - skillful and satisfying to play, but vulnerable when making mistakes"

With that in mind, I'd rather have an Ahri with more restricted mobility but better usability to her skills, than an Ahri who can poke at very little risk, but with a greater drain on her mana.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

Ideally, though, her optimal Q use shouldn't be its max-range use, but rather the use of it at close to middle ranges while repositioning mid-fight, which I think can be encouraged using her mobility.

Why is this desirable? Max range Q being optimal creates maximum counterplay and the clearest positioning minigame.

The intent here is not to nerf Ahri in a general sense...Ahri's pick and win rates says she's pretty successful, so she'd be able to take a nerf like this fairly well.

Good design requires clear intent, and I don't hear one from you. Is your plan to nerf Ahri, or shift power from one part of her power budget to another? The design steps we take to follow up on the idea change based on which of these is the goal.

If there is a way to rebalance the ability so that Ahri keeps the same amount of mobility and remains healthy, then that would be fine, and if she ends up being too weak, it would help to understand what she's specifically lacking (besides free movement, which I don't think is entirely healthy).

I don't understand your question. The nature of power budgets is that when a champion is weak, literally anything will work. One thing we currently know is that the Q MS buff and the E damage amp are of approximately equal weight, for example.

Again, you are following the reasoning that Ahri must have unhealthily strong mobility to remain viable, and that any buff to her raw movement speed bonus would break her.

I am arguing neither of those things. I am arguing;

  1. X% MS on hit is significantly weaker than X% MS on cast
  2. Giving Ahri an equivalent amount of power in an % MS on hit would require something in the range of 2X-3X% MS
  3. That large an MS buff exposes you to unforeseen design health consequences.

her evasion should come into play when she's genuinely in combat with her opponent, and not just poking them from a distance. Ahri is most interesting when she's putting herself at risk and moving around her enemies at calculatedly short distances...

Ahri is intended to be very good at poking. It's a core design value. She is intended to spend almost all of her time poking from long range; she only closes range after poking the opponent down enough that her combo will kill if it lands.

Ahri is not Vayne, and does not have the tools to stay close to the enemy for long. In any given two minute stretch of play, Ahri intends to be within 550 range for less than five seconds. If you want her to want to play from that range more often, you're going to need a rework.

It's this excessive safety that caused the nerfs to her mana costs in Patch 5.3:

The cited explanation was about W and R range nerfs, which force Ahri to get closer when she commits.

The mana cost nerfs are simply trimming unnecessary power; they don't bring her Q cost up to the level it was on launch or during her first rework. There's no design commentary to be found there beyond "Ahri is too strong, this will make her weaker in a relatively palatable way".

Teridax681 votes

{quoted}

Why is this desirable? Max range Q being optimal creates maximum counterplay and the clearest positioning minigame.

I disagree on both counts. Max-range Q eliminates a lot of counterplay by turning a two-part nuke into a one-part ability, and reduces a lot of Ahri's gameplay as well. Firing Q from closer ranges can guarantee an initial hit, but also gives her opponent a window to dodge the true damage on return while also placing them closer to Ahri herself, and Ahri gets to do cooler things with her orb and movement when trying to move it around the battlefield, rather than just trying to catch enemies at its edge.

{quoted}

Good design requires clear intent, and I don't hear one from you. Is your plan to nerf Ahri, or shift power from one part of her power budget to another? The design steps we take to follow up on the idea change based on which of these is the goal.

The topic here is balancing, not design, and even if it were design my intent here remains clear: I want Ahri's basic ability movement to be conditional upon enemy interaction. If that means she gets to have more power elsewhere, that's great, but also not my primary intent. To categorize this as a desire to just buff or nerf Ahri in general is both overly simplistic and misleading for the core argument.

{quoted}

I don't understand your question. The nature of power budgets is that when a champion is weak, literally anything will work.

That is not how power budgets work. By that rationale, you could shift all of a champion's damage onto a single ability, and they would somehow have no issues. What matters more than just a champion's power budget (which is also an estimate and not an exact measure) is a champion's health. There are definitely a lot of things on Ahri that could be buffed without breaking her (her mana management, for example), but I feel that she might not even need a buff with the change I'm suggesting. If she would, however, i.e. if she became unviable, despite there being a lot of healthy levers on her to pull it would be worth finding out which one would need to be adjusted specifically.

{quoted}

I am arguing neither of those things. I am arguing;

  1. X% MS on hit is significantly weaker than X% MS on cast
  2. Giving Ahri an equivalent amount of power in an % MS on hit would require something in the range of 2X-3X% MS
  3. That large an MS buff exposes you to unforeseen design health consequences.

But then again, you are presuming that giving Ahri more movespeed would automatically make her toxic, when there is nothing to support that claim. I'm not proposing to buff Ahri's raw movement speed from her Q, necessarily, but if it were to come to that I think she'd still be healthy even with a lot more mobility.

{quoted}

Ahri is intended to be very good at poking. It's a core design value. She is intended to spend almost all of her time poking from long range; she only closes range after poking the opponent down enough that her combo will kill if it lands.

I completely disagree with this. Ahri is a mage-assassin: by design, she wants to get closer to her opponent in order to kill them, and her W, E and ultimate all cater to that. She does have good poke, and that's fine, but she's meant to be at her strongest when at risky ranges from her target (i.e. Fox-Fire distance). Even her Q, her pokiest ability, is most interesting when used from up close. I'm not saying she has to lose her poke, especially since poke is core to a lot of healthy assassins' playstyles, but I do think she should be encouraged to make riskier plays with her Q, and not just try to land it from the farthest distance possible.

{quoted}

Ahri is not Vayne, and does not have the tools to stay close to the enemy for long. In any given two minute stretch of play, Ahri intends to be within 550 range for less than five seconds. If you want her to want to play from that range more often, you're going to need a rework.

Her triple-dash ultimate, 2-second enemy-attracting hard crowd control and movespeed-enhancing Q all beg to differ. She has even better tools than Vayne when it comes to staying close to her enemies, at least for a short-ish window of time, and that's enough to encourage her to fight from up close.

{quoted}

The cited explanation was about W and R range nerfs, which force Ahri to get closer when she commits. The mana cost nerfs are simply trimming unnecessary power; they don't bring her Q cost up to the level it was on launch or during her first rework. There's no design commentary to be found there beyond "Ahri is too strong, this will make her weaker in a relatively palatable way".

I think this is omitting a large part of her nerfs: sure, she got a riskier W, but her mana costs got nerfed to trim down the access to her less risky power. I would rather she had riskier power with lesser mana costs, than safer power with greater mana costs. Again, buffs and nerfs don't just get dished out at random just because a champion needs to be more or less powerful overall, they're done with a very specific intention in mind.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

The topic here is balancing, not design, and even if it were design my intent here remains clear: I want Ahri's basic ability movement to be conditional upon enemy interaction.

You are proposing mechanical changes and worrying about champion health. Neither of those things are about balance.

That is not how power budgets work. By that rationale, you could shift all of a champion's damage onto a single ability, and they would somehow have no issues.

This is a strawman. I did not say that such a change would be power neutral.

What I said is this: when a champion is too weak, you can make them no longer weak by adding some amount of any kind of power you wish.

I completely disagree with this. Ahri is a mage-assassin: by design, she wants to get closer to her opponent in order to kill them, and her W, E and ultimate all cater to that.

I think Ahri dislikes being close to the opponent. She wants to be as far away as possible, and only jumps in to finish a charmed target.

From my point of view, that's why Riot picked the nerf they did -- by making W acquisition range shorter, they force her to get closer to the target. If Ahri naturally wanted to get in close, that wouldn't be much of a nerf, would it?

I do think she should be encouraged to make riskier plays with her Q, and not just try to land it from the farthest distance possible.

This is an interesting take. Possibly it would make the kit better. How would you propose to do this?

SmokingPuffin1 votes

even something as simple as a number change can't really be labeled as a "pure" balance or design change.

Balance changes affect playstyle all the time. Doesn't mean the design has changed.

But my proposal is specifically targeting both Ahri's reliability and applicability. Why are we arguing about this again?

I was referring to the reliability and applicability of the change, not the champion. A reliable balance change is one that we have high confidence hits the target power level. An applicable balance change is one that is well targeted to the problem cases, with limited spillover to other cases.

Where does one draw the line between balance and design?

Design is picking the mechanics. Balance is picking the numbers. This is a bit glib, but pretty close to the truth.

How do you quantify "farther than it typically goes"?

Each mechanic has a list of current users, which you can easily chart to see its typical range. Just a few examples: ranged basic attack is ~550, stun duration is The same could be said for you. I mention the entirety of Ahri's kit minus her Q, plus Riot's own patch notes, as evidence of her fighting at close-ish ranges, and you bring up one very specific use of one of her abilities as a reason for why you think she's long-ranged, while ignoring everything else she does.

I described, to the best of my ability, the way Ahri is played in the competitive scene today. I don't believe I described a niche use case.

I wouldn't say Ahri is long ranged. I feel that Ahri is a modal champion. She can play in low-risk, low-damage mode throwing max range Qs. She can jump into high-risk, high-damage mode when she spots a weak target. Overall, she spends most of her time in low-risk mode with the current kit.

The 5.3 changes, which I totally agree with, are intended to make her get closer to go into high damage mode, but they left her low risk mode virtually unchanged.

Teridax681 votes

Even in competitive play, though, Ahri still makes most of her plays at close range. Look at Faker's Ahri even before 5.3, where he was deleting supports by jumping into them at practically point-blank distance. Saying her long-range Q makes her a long-range champion follows the same reasoning as saying Kassadin is a long-ranged champion (which you did), or that Zed, who has even longer-ranged poke, is a long-ranged champion, neither of which are true. I'm not discounting the fact that she can poke from a good distance, but overall most her kit only fully works at riskier ranges. In either case, though, shifting Ahri's power away from her longer-ranged playstyle and more towards her closer-ranged playstyle would be a healthy move, and one that would work with the rest of her kit.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

Even in competitive play, though, Ahri still makes most of her plays at close range. Look at Faker's Ahri even before 5.3, where he was deleting supports by jumping into them at practically point-blank distance.

I don't see this as being outside the description I gave. As mentioned, Ahri is modal. She spends most of her time in low risk mode, but when she sees an opportunity, she dives for it with RE initiations.

Saying her long-range Q makes her a long-range champion follows the same reasoning as saying Kassadin is a long-ranged champion (which you did)

Are you sure? Perhaps you should read again.

In either case, though, shifting Ahri's power away from her longer-ranged playstyle and more towards her closer-ranged playstyle would be a healthy move, and one that would work with the rest of her kit.

I think this design direction could work. I don't see how the movement speed change you propose does that.

At this point it seems we have pretty much covered the topic. Have a nice evening.

Teridax681 votes

You suggested Kassadin as a counterexample to why squishy ranged champions don't instinctively want to get close to their opponents if they can get away with not doing so.

We've strayed so far from the point here that I think it's worth bringing back the original: I feel Ahri's Q mobility shouldn't be free, which is why I think it should be tied to her dealing damage with it to enemy champions. How it applies isn't the most important part (though having it apply on each hit would likely make the most sense, and encourage her to reposition properly for an accurate return), but the change itself would make sense in terms of gameplay (firing a ball anywhere shouldn't make anyone more mobile in itself) and would make Ahri difficult to hit only if she successfully pokes or kites her enemy, which wouldn't let her pre-emptively dodge counter-poke by quickly moving back to safe ranges. I don't see anything immediately wrong with that change, nor do I see anything in the freedom of her current Q movement that merits keeping.

forist1 votes

A champion being op is unhealthy. Its promoting less diversity and indicates favoritism on riot's part. I'm saying that ahri's current ratios combined with her kit do lack counter-play. Hence the example of her missing all her skillshots but killing you with auto-targeted range spells. She has way too much mobility and kite potential to be a healthy lane opponent. Yes, talon's burst can seem overwhelming, but it can be avoided with a little bit of skill, ahri's on the other hand, is basically to get in range to get a kill, but her range vastly outshines any melee champs, so she can chunk you without any risk or chance of retaliation. And because of her mobility if you try to run away instead of fight, she'll just stick to you and finish the job.

RoyaiChaos7 votes

Ahri can't kill you with just w r r r. If she does, it's because you got poked by her q/e or were already low.

forist1 votes

The exact same thing can be said for talon, yet people somehow conveniently forget that excuse when talking about him.

Sire Hippington5 votes

As a former talon main, i heavily disagree. There is nothing you can do to avoid his burst rotation, unless your really fast with instand cc or flash the moment he uses E. And if he is slightly ahead, that one burstrotation is enough to delete any squishy in ~0-5sec

Ahrie beeing able to kill without landing Q or E is not a problem of her generall design, but of beeing overtuned. Since the latest nerfs, Ahri hardly can kill anyone without landing her Q+E, unless she's really fed.

RoyaiChaos1 votes

Ahri's more of a mage than an assassin. And I'm confused, what buffs? Her w and r ranges were both nerfed, and her w only received a small damage buff. DFG was also removed so less damage from that, also also the charm amp so also less damage there.

forist1 votes

Here: http://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-52-notes

q - massive movement speed boost

w- 40/65/90/115/140 magic damage ⇒ 50/80/110/140/170 magic damage Slightly reduced the time between spell cast and the missile firing Casting Fox-Fire no longer interferes with Ahri's basic attack animation

e- no dmg amp anymore 60/90/120/150/180 magic damage ⇒ 60/95/130/165/200 magic damage RATIO 0.35 ability power >> 0.5 ability power

r- more forgiving when moving through terrain

RoyaiChaos1 votes

I should have been more specific, what buffs that allowed her to kill with just w r r r? Her w r r r was overall rescued counting dfg and charm. Without dfg and charm, it gained 30 magic damage when fully leveled.

forist1 votes

The numbers help and all, but really the main buff that made her able to kill with so little effort is the q moves-speed. She didn't need any more mobility. More sticking and escape potential. Riot removed dfg, and gave her both more damage and utility to compensate, because league of mobility. It's ridiculous that they thought ahri needed compensation for dfg in the first place, she has been a top tier mid laner ever since her q mana cost reduction awhile back, not counting before the whole charm rework ofc.

RoyaiChaos1 votes

But we're talking only about her w r r r as you're suggesting she can now kill with only those two spells because of her buffs. I'm saying that her w and r were hardly buffed enough to allow her to kill someone with only those two spells..

jjookkeerr4 votes

leblanc also is healty, her strength and weakness are all clear

Junkο25 votes

QRW dead in 0.5 sec Wait you didn't die? Well let me just port back to where i was without giving you a chance to fight back

yep tons of counterplay.

GaleWinUnleashed16 votes

This sounds suspiciously similar to Zed =P It's the ability to walk away like nothing happened that is so frustrating.

blujadajhdja6 votes

{quoted}

This sounds suspiciously similar to Zed =P It's the ability to walk away like nothing happened that is so frustrating.

Agreed, as a Zed player, I liked it better where his shadow was placed behind his target, it made me think more before I mashed my second R. I'd honestly like to see Riot reduce his AOE damage to minions and maybe increase his damage output a little if it turns out to be too big of a nerf.

GaleWinUnleashed2 votes

I find him to be pretty reasonable as an assassin. It's just too much when can also waveclear easily and have one of the safest laning phases in the game.

blujadajhdja6 votes

His laning phase isn't that safe IMO. The real problem in his safety lies within his ultimate, which is why I suggested that Riot should change its shadow placement back to before around the time he was released so he can't push R to bail without thinking. His waveclear is why I suggested that they should make his abilities do less damage to minions.

Thryale3 votes

I second this. Most zeds can kill you before the ult even pops atm anyway. So what's it matter if he's got another shadow next to you now? Yer already dead to begin with.

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 DoFr

can we get 3 new refunds with each new season?
Gameplay182 comments
559
votes
there's 1 mastery that i feel like it should never have left..
Gameplay189 comments
454
votes
lets do to zed what we did to aatrox
Gameplay197 comments
262
votes
can we please, PLEASE have doom bots and Ascension again?
Gameplay116 comments
194
votes
as a jungle main, let me tell you about bullshit.
Gameplay225 comments
173
votes
Sion's rework is by far the most outstanding reworks i have ever seen
Gameplay188 comments
140
votes