Why are Janna and Warwick being ignored every patch?

Rαy·Apr 17, 2018·44 votes·12,042 views

Just wondering why they aren't even getting touched on PBE. They got the highest win- AND pick rates, yet remain unchanged for so many patches now. Why is that? Every player knows they are far too strong for being that easy to play. Does Riot not?

I mean, these champs don't seem hard to balance either. Tone down a shield, reduce some self-healing, but ffs, do something?

Edit: I just read the newest patchnotes, however, I do not think Janna's upcoming nerf is meaningful in the slightest. Her absurd winrate will go down a bit, then recover to its old state again. The state it's roughly been at for 8 years.

As for Warwick: I do like his design. I think his kit is engaging and fun to play and play against. His numbers are just too high though. Damage, tankiness, self-healing, lock-down AND AOE-CC needs a downside.

94 Comments

The Bad TouchApr 17, 201821 votes

Because the Multi millions dollar Riot money machine can only afford 1 guy in his momma's basement to work on balance and he's too busy nerfing/buffing base damage on abilities by 5.

Maybe they should cut 200 or 300 people off their art department from skin creation... and fix more than 10 things a month with balance.

Oh wait though.. that would mean less skins to sell to stupid people.

Dasdi96Apr 17, 20185 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Bad Touch,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P4h9bTbf,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-04-17T02:39:01.847+0000)

Because the Multi millions dollar Riot money machine can only afford 1 guy in his momma's basement to work on balance and he's too busy nerfing/buffing base damage on abilities by 5.

Maybe they should cut 200 or 300 people off their art department from skin creation... and fix more than 10 things a month with balance.

Oh wait though.. that would mean less skins to sell to stupid people.

Gotta sell those Janna skins.

HarrisonOwnsApr 17, 20183 votes

3ad never forget

Also, I called this years ago when their Asian Overlords: Tencent, bought them out. It would go full microtransaction crazy and milk it dry while ignoring the majority of the playerbase.

Child of the PitApr 17, 20182 votes

As far as i see there is no microtransaction in this games state that would influence the game in any way, so i don't know where you are coming from with this point.

HarrisonOwnsApr 18, 20181 votes

They focus far more resources into their microtransactions than they do fixing the state of their game. That's my point, not the influence those MTX directly have themselves. I am very well aware that they do not affect the game directly. (except obviously broken skins that give disgusting advantages such as Underworld TF did for WAY TOO LONG)

Child of the PitApr 18, 20181 votes

Oh man.

They focus far more resources into their microtransactions than they do fixing the state of their game.

They have to focus ressources into micro transactions, it's their only way to make money, the only way to pay their employees, if they take away funds from the Skin depertment and put it into the balance department it will be more than counter-productive for them, aka, if they shift the ressourced like that the company will go bankrupt sooner or later, so please stop all the talk about ''They should focus more in game balance than creating skins'', it's stuipd, it won't happen, get over it.

Also if Underworld twisted fate would give disgusting advantages i am preety sure Riot would have adressed this already, and ability particles being too small is not that big of a deal, you can still see them, the hitbox won't change, plan accordingly.

The only disgusting thing is that you almost cannot see the Snowtrail of Snow Day Singed in Colourblind mode.

notice me Sin piApr 17, 20182 votes

3ad nerf at least actually had impact on early game. 5% AD ratio nerf on kaisa has impact only after game has already been decided by 10min. Current balance team is even worse imo

AirKingNeoApr 17, 20182 votes

lol and this is why riot doesn't take you or anyone who upvotes you seriously

The Bad TouchApr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

lol and this is why riot doesn't take you or anyone who upvotes you seriously

As if Riot takes ANYONE seriously that isn't Korean/Chinese.

Cool story though.

Teridax68Apr 17, 201816 votes

I will defend Warwick's design to the death, but I don't understand at all why his balance has remained untouched for so long, when he's been overperforming for quite some time. He may not have competitive presence, but he's become a monster at all other elos, and so for months now. The OP is also right in that he's not particularly difficult to balance, at least in my personal opinion, because ultimately most of his power boils down to some very basic variables that each achieve a specific goal. If, for example, the issue is with his self-healing (which seems to be the case), then a basic fix would be to tone down his on-hit magic damage, and increase his base AD if need be. Alternatively, if the problem is with his Q providing too much burst healing, then changing the healing percentage would solve the matter.

What annoys me as well with Warwick is that I think he actually deserves buffs in certain respects: his Q coding is awkward and unresponsive, and deserves to be streamlined into a model where Q immediately provides a dash + bite, and only afterwards has him swing around if he holds the ability. His R hitbox is also notoriously thin, and reacts so badly with latency that it sometimes looks like he passes clean through his opponent and still misses. Improving these I think could have a major and beneficial impact on Warwick's gameplay, but as long as he remains in his current balance state, any change that would benefit him will continue to remain off the table. I'd gladly sacrifice some of his baseline power if it meant implementing these fixes, and I think we would all appreciate a Warwick with better responsiveness and fewer free stats.

As for Janna, she's getting her movement speed and W damage nerfed by 5 each next patch: I feel these changes will have a larger impact on her than most think, but I don't think it will knock her off her throne anytime soon either. Janna's consistently had an extremely high win and play rate for entire seasons now, and I feel at this point any change that affects her is also likely to upset the competitive scene, which continues to heavily rely on her.

VenomarApr 17, 20183 votes

{quoted}

I will defend Warwick's design to the death, but I don't understand at all why his balance has remained untouched for so long, when he's been overperforming for quite some time. He may not have competitive presence, but he's become a monster at all other elos, and so for months now. The OP is also right in that he's not particularly difficult to balance, at least in my personal opinion, because ultimately most of his power boils down to some very basic variables that each achieve a specific goal. If, for example, the issue is with his self-healing (which seems to be the case), then a basic fix would be to tone down his on-hit magic damage, and increase his base AD if need be. Alternatively, if the problem is with his Q providing too much burst healing, then changing the healing percentage would solve the matter.

What annoys me as well with Warwick is that I think he actually deserves buffs in certain respects: his Q coding is awkward and unresponsive, and deserves to be streamlined into a model where Q immediately provides a dash + bite, and only afterwards has him swing around if he holds the ability. His R hitbox is also notoriously thin, and reacts so badly with latency that it sometimes looks like he passes clean through his opponent and still misses. Improving these I think could have a major and beneficial impact on Warwick's gameplay, but as long as he remains in his current balance state, any change that would benefit him will continue to remain off the table. I'd gladly sacrifice some of his baseline power if it meant implementing these fixes, and I think we would all appreciate a Warwick with better responsiveness and fewer free stats.

As for Janna, she's getting her movement speed and W damage nerfed by 5 each next patch: I feel these changes will have a larger impact on her than most think, but I don't think it will knock her off her throne anytime soon either. Janna's consistently had an extremely high win and play rate for entire seasons now, and I feel at this point any change that affects her is also likely to upset the competitive scene, which continues to heavily rely on her.

Warwick seems to balanced around his unreliability. Much like Shaco , because he has some bugs that can completely fuck him at times, he's allowed to be "stronger" than the baseline would dictate in some areas to compensate for the fact that he was coded by a moth using a light bright.

Teridax68Apr 17, 20181 votes

Exactly, and I absolutely hate that kind of design. As a rule of thumb, I don't think it's ever justifiable to balance some dysfunctional part of the game with another dysfunctionality, yet we frequently have situations where champions in League are balanced around their bugs. What's worse, some players and even designers have even opposed fixing these bugs at times, simply because doing so would constitute a buff to the champion. It's a terrible balancing mentality that has caused a lot of champions to remain in a broken state for far too long, and I think we need to take a new approach where bug fixes take priority, so that kits can be balanced around how they're intended to work, rather than remain warped by their technical issues.

HarrisonOwnsApr 17, 20183 votes

cough buttonmashing bads who play riven cough

"animation canceling exploitation is a feature" -bads

AuurunApr 17, 20181 votes

I don't understand why would you defend WWs design so much when he's the most uninteractive of all VGUs lately. IMO main damage source of a champion should never be reliable and here we see WW that has point and click Q that guarantees his fear if timed correctly which in turn guarantees his ult. Often reworks are here to make champion feel better to play against, but considering that his rework has added barely any counterplay while making him actually viable I think facing old WW was less oppressive and shitty experience.

Teridax68Apr 17, 20182 votes

I'm not sure why you got downvoted on this, though I also disagree with the point here. To me, reliability on a champion's kit is a resource that can be shifted around, so long as it remains at a sufficiently balanced level: in Warwick's case, for sure his autoattack-based damage is reliable (once you're in melee range, anyway), but his means of approaching his targets, and his power when fighting them, isn't, and that gives him a ton of unreliability and tactical counterplay.

A lot of what Warwick does is on this sliding scale between power and reliability, so that Warwick can choose what kind of counterplay he wants to give to his opponents: if he wants to detonate E immediately for the fear or ult at point-blank range, for example, he can, but in doing so he sacrifices a ton of power that can make or break certain matches. If he chooses to use E for the damage reduction on top of the fear, or ult from a distance, he can get much more out of his kit, but also opens himself far more to his more telegraphed effects getting outplayed, making his power much less reliable.

All of this is putting aside his blood hunt mechanic, which forces Warwick to pick and choose his fights when on equal power, instead of mindlessly charging the first opponent he sees. There's a lot that can be done to mitigate the new Warwick's power, and Warwick's kit makes him naturally easy to pick up while still offering tons of potential for mastery, which is why I think he's quite possibly the best VGU Riot has produced so far, at least in pure gameplay terms.

AuurunApr 17, 20181 votes

He's not nearly as unreliable as you claim him to be. The only thing he sacrifices by activating his E early is damage reduction which if he gets off his fear on his target only really matters in team fights. The same goes for his ult which from what I know does not gain in power (damage, CC duration etc.) with distance and the only thing he gains is range on this ability which again is meaningless if he can land this, so I don't see any reason to not use this on point blank range when fighting 1v1. His W also in such case does not give any agency to his opponent. If somebody is alone I often see scenario where WW is just activating his W, runs them down, still uses E for damage reduction when approaching and still with Q at the last second guarantees his fear and therefore ult.

All his counterplay revolves around teamfights and macro play which in current league is no longer fine. He continues to bring the same type of unnecessary frustration that champions like Master Yi, Jax or Xin Zhao do. Not to mention that abilities that can be used only in certain situations are poor design since they decrease the amount of possible play and that makes champions with them significantly more boring to play as, against and watching them. Because of that I consider him one of the worst VGUs right now gameplay wise.

Teridax68Apr 17, 20182 votes

Sacrificing WW's damage reduction is a big gamble later in the game, because doing so can very likely lead him to getting killed, where holding onto the effect could have otherwise saved him. I also feel you're similarly missing the point with his ult: there's no power scaling with distance, but the fact that his ult is a gapcloser is itself a massive amount of power. If you choose to ult at point-blank range, you're choosing to completely sacrifice the large dash component, which means trading off a huge amount of power for reliability, and means you're having Warwick walk up to his opponent instead, which is itself unreliable in an environment filled with CC, damage and mobility.

Warwick activating his W may not have it get completely countered, but the hunt effect is nonetheless telegraphed enormously, more than practically any other effect. If you see the effect on you, you're clearly being told to play more carefully and to expect a gank, and if you see the mark pop up when you're at a good amount of health, you know to retreat to your tower, or towards an ally. When Warwick manages to successfully run down an opponent with W, uses E and Q in perfect succession to corral his opponent, and then also has the opportunity to point-blank ult them, then Warwick has played perfectly while giving his opponent plenty of ways to react to him: he telegraphed his intent with W, telegraphed his E enough for his opponent to mess up its repositioning by moving even slightly to the side, walked in range to use his Q, and then sacrificed his ult's gapclosing power. He may have a gameplay pattern where he runs up to enemies and kills them, but I think he's the only champion who truly does that in an interesting manner, as opposed to champions like Yi or Jax.

AuurunApr 17, 20181 votes

Having something telegraphed does not mean it's fair. There are situations when you don't have turrets or allies nearby and then what does it matter that I know he's coming if I know he's just gonna statcheck me. I just spend more time watching me dying to him and that's the only difference. It's not fair in the slightest. Every champion needs to outplayable in a 1v1 regardless of situation. Using only his W to run down someone and using his QE combo is not nearly as hard and even if it was it's still uninteractive. Basically what you saying is that his counterplay is don't be alone and stay out of range which is a type of gameplay that should simply die out. And as I said in a 1v1 scenario sacrificing his gap closing power of his ult is not a big deal.

Also I think abilities like his E as in "something happens around your champion" are problematic. Even if they are delayed since you know where they gonna come from it boils down to "you have enough mobility to get out of range or not".

I don't mind champions having some reliability, but it should always be absolute minimum. If I were to call Warwick healthy champion at the very least he should get actual penalty damage wise if he uses his ult on point blank range and his Q should be turn into a skillshot or given some other unique type of counterplay that would allow to completely negate it's effect regardless of situation.

HarrisonOwnsApr 17, 20183 votes

"Every champion needs to outplayable in a 1v1 regardless of situation."

You don't understand how games work.

AuurunApr 17, 20181 votes

{quoted}

"Every champion needs to outplayable in a 1v1 regardless of situation."

You don't understand how games work.

Then explain what I don't understand. Counterplay is not a strenght or weakness, it's a design rule. The moment some champions got a ability to be outplayed regardless of who they are facing it shoulr be applied to everyone. Playing by the same rules is the most important thing in games and ot seems you are the one not understanding this.

I'm not surprised gaming these days is in such shitty state when inconsistency in gameplay is now valued as something good.

ValyrianBladeApr 17, 20182 votes

{quoted}

Then explain what I don't understand. Counterplay is not a strenght or weakness, it's a design rule. The moment some champions got a ability to be outplayed regardless of who they are facing it shoulr be applied to everyone. Playing by the same rules is the most important thing in games and ot seems you are the one not understanding this.

I'm not surprised gaming these days is in such shitty state when inconsistency in gameplay is now valued as something good.

This mindset seems to more often be the problem than the solution.

The reason most champions turn out is as OP is because they are supposed to have clear weaknesses, but then the designer puts in a way for them to outplay their weakness. Mastering the champion boils down to learning how to outplay your weakness, and once you can do that consistently, there's no weakness on the champion which is terrible balance.

There was a good post explaining how this applied to most of CertainlyT's champions. Basically stuff like how Darius is supposed to be weak to kiting, but between the range of his grab being close to most ADCs auto range, plus his movement speed, he's often able to outplay this weakness and grab the ADC in a 1v1. Darius should be weak to an ADC in a 1v1 because he should never be able to get on top of them (he should need an ally to help him out), but in reality it's the ADC that needs peel.

Champions have weaknesses and that's a good thing. Warwick SHOULD counter champions that lack mobility at low health. He can get on them and stat check them. The problem then, is what is Warwick's weakness? He's supposed to be weak in teamfights and fall off late, but a good Warwick gets around that, he can W to run at them, Q a front line to rotate around, then ult into the backline (all with damage reduction). A Warwick is only weak in teamfights when he thinks his only option is to go directly for the back line and not use Q on the front line. Getting a fear on the tank to avoid cc and Q to get between the tank and carry, opens up an easy ult to win a teamfight.

AuurunApr 17, 20182 votes

It doesn't work this way. Being unreliable does not mean you automatically have to be more powerful and not have any weaknesses. But having no options to work around your weakness is also a bad thing. There is a point somewhere in between where champion has clear weaknesses and can be outplayed, but also where he has outplay potential and multiple options to handle situations. Some older champions like Annie or Nasus fall to much into the first part where or they have is weaknesses and reliability which is not a good thing, while some newer champions like Yasuo or Camille for in the second part to much.

But the reason why less reliable champions get so much stats and shit in their kits is pretty simple and I have no idea how people cannot realize that. They have so much, because reliable ones exist. When in one game you have champions that don't have to aim and can't be outplayed by sheer skill and the ones that can be outplayed and if they are on the same power level guess which one is more valuable. If there is a champion that can do the exact same thing with less effort and risk of not achieving what they want (landing skill) there's no point in picking unreliable champion. Pro player proved this many times, always picking champions with less counterplay unless something less reliable is outright OP. That's why they are so powerful, because they are balanced with the idea that they have to compete with reliable ones in mind. As long as there are champions without non-situational counterplay champions based on skillshots and other things like this won't be striped down of their unnecessary strengths.

Edit: Honestly all these downvotes only proof what I thought of this community. Everyone will defend their beloved WW out of guilty pleasure of being able to rekt someone through point and clicks. Seriously this community doesn't understand gameplay design in the slightest and will only defend something they enjoy without giving this any thought. What I'm saying in this post is already a compromised, cause I had much more extreme ideas about this game in the past. I'm confident in my understanding of games cause before I made my first comment here I already spent almost 2 years lurking this forum and not just playing this game, but also deeply analyzing it.

People may defend Warwick right now, but if future reworks will be as good as Irelias then at some point he will become a problem and get some changes later down the line, I'm sure of it.

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

Actually, from the looks of it, the reason you're being downvoted is because you're clearly not engaging in constructive dialogue, so much as proselytizing your One True Way™ of designing games, in spite of all contrary evidence and logic, and with your mere 2 years of lurking on the forums as your sole token of expertise, a fact you somehow appear to take pride in. You came here with your mind already made up, and have been refusing entirely to listen to what so many others have explained to you in rather simple terms. Playing the martyr and claiming that we're all just greedy Warwick mains doesn't quite work, because the very post you originally responded to, i.e. mine, very clearly stated that Warwick needs nerfs, an opinion shared by practically everyone else who has posted on this thread. This specific portion of your rant seems to indicate you may also have issues differentiating balance from design.

The other main issue with your point here is also that it's completely irrelevant: sure, reliability is a form of power, and champions that have more reliability and are equal in all other respects to their competition are more likely to get picked, even if that reliability only unlocks at higher levels of play. This is indeed an issue with many of League's champions, one that has warped the balance of competitive poster children such as Janna, Azir, Ryze, and so on, but it is not an issue with Warwick. For all this complaining about pro play, Warwick does not actually have any real competitive presence, and in an environment where practically every champion gets called toxic on a hair trigger, even when the real issue is their balance, Warwick is perceived by the near-totality of players as healthy and interactive, even when he is indeed too strong. You are free to disagree, but to think that this disagreement means you know better on which champions in League are fun than everyone else is both presumptuous and solipsistic.

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

I'm sorry if It came across this way, but this literally the only thing where I cannot agree regardless of reasoning of others. Yes there are to forms of counterplay, macro and micro, but In my opinion they are so different that one cannot replace the other. If I as a for example Illaoi have to deal with the fact that I cannot nearly as much pick my fights, can still be screwed my macro play and then on top can still be outplayed by sheer skill, then Warwick also deserves little bit of micro counterplay. So my problems with him ARE design related. Sure he may be to strong right now or have bugs, but my point is centered around types of counterplay and why I don't think having champions all counterplay centered around macro play.

I get it that this concept of macro counterplay may be interesting and I agree, but if going to start adding it to champions it should not be at expense of micro counterplay otherwise such champions still gonna be as oppressive as some other champions like autoattackers. Yi is also screwed by CC and I still think it's not too good of a excuse to keep his as is. I much rather see Warwick get some unreliability in direct fight and other champions that are based around mechanical on spot counterplay get some of this macro counterplay.

He doesn't have much presence in pro-play rather because of meta not favoring him as much. It's simply better to have multiple tanks protecting ADC instead of a guy that can get screwed by some stupid items with grievous wounds. Also Warwick simply is not as bloated with mechanics as some other champions that got created lately, but that only shows exactly what I mean. He's closer to older champions in that he unlike some newer champions still has some clear weaknesses. For me he's just a little to close to older champions while some other are to close to Yasuo style champions. There's probably middle ground somewhere there, but IMO WW is still not there.

At the end, the only moment I showed some pride and arrogance is that last comment. The rest of earlier downvotes is simply people disagreeing and it's not something new around here. But I admit I have some pride in my understanding of games, because I simply analyze pretty much all games I play and I actually looking to becoming game developer in the future, but that's besides a point. Either way I'm sorry for the tone of my comments.

That being said nobody here really tried to find compromise. All we did was stating why we think WW is fine or not. I just wanted the fact that he can without enemy having to much to say kill him acknowledged. I on the other hand only implied that I accept that there is something that can be done against him regardless of it's nature, so sorry for that and let me admit that now. Yes there is some different forms of counterplay and he's not completely reliable. But as I said earlier that simply not enough. So may I ask if you see some possible solutions to this or if my suggestion about evening things out and making every champion have both of these types of counterplay is fine?

By the way. I believe there can be much more types of micro counterplay and not only skillshots and have quite a lot of ideas, but that would take entire new post so not gonna list them here.

And also... It's not that nice to paint me as some prick that ignores what others may say. Just because I didn't give much opportunities to observe how I change my mind in discussions with other doesn't mean I completely incapable of compromise. My opinion on League is heavily influenced by other people posts honestly including your posts.

EDIT: words

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

I'm sorry if It came across this way, but this literally the only thing where I cannot agree regardless of reasoning of others.

... okay, but that's bad, because if you're set on your ideas no matter what anyone else says, then that means you're refusing to listen to others and learn from them, at least on this matter. It's fine to disagree with someone, but in this particular case you're actively telling others that they're wrong, simply because you personally feel some type of way, all while refusing to admit where you yourself have been proven wrong. How exactly do you think things would turn out of someone with the exact same attitude as you decided to argue against you on this type of point?

{quoted}

Yes there are to forms of counterplay, macro and micro, but In my opinion they are so different that one cannot replace the other. If I as a for example Illaoi have to deal with the fact that I cannot nearly as much pick my fights, can still be screwed my macro play and then on top can still be outplayed by sheer skill, then Warwick also deserves little bit of micro counterplay. So my problems with him ARE design related. Sure he may be to strong right now or have bugs, but my point is centered around types of counterplay and why I don't think having champions all counterplay centered around macro play.

So first off, Warwick does in fact have micro counterplay (again, his Q swing and E are heavily affected by positioning, and his ult can be dodged), but the fact that you'd attack Warwick's design but defend Illaoi's, to me comes across as utterly ridiculous. Illaoi is notorious for not only being binary, but also for being an oppressive lane bully due to her simplistic counterplay not functioning properly in a laning environment (she wins when staying in the same area for a long time, which is what laning forces everyone to do). Her counterplay at the macro level is binary, and her counterplay at the micro level is severely insufficient.

I agree that mechanical, tactical and strategic gameplay are all different from each other (and that makes three types, not two), and I agree that it's likely best if no champion put all of their eggs in one basket and lacked two of those forms of gameplay entirely, but I do think it's possible to shift champions more towards one type than the others. Just in League, for example, we have a ton of champions with very micro-focused gameplay, but comparatively underdeveloped tactical and strategic counterplay. In this respect, Warwick is no different in that his gameplay is mostly tactical, rather than mechanical or strategic, even if he has a bit of both as well. Not every League champion needs to be mechanically intense, and while we can have fighting game-style champions, that need not be the model for every kit.

{quoted}

I get it that this concept of macro counterplay may be interesting and I agree, but if going to start adding it to champions it should not be at expense of micro counterplay otherwise such champions still gonna be as oppressive as some other champions like autoattackers. Yi is also screwed by CC and I still think it's not too good of a excuse to keep his as is. I much rather see Warwick get some unreliability in direct fight and other champions that are based around mechanical on spot counterplay get some of this macro counterplay.

What you are pointing out with Yi is an example of binary counterplay, rather than macro counterplay. I'm not asking for champions to auto-win or auto-lose simply because they exist in a match, and that's not what macro counterplay is. Strategic gameplay can be as simple and as deep as choosing which ally to gift a jungle buff, and counterplay can be something as nuanced as choosing whether to defend or to take Baron when the enemy team is taking bot and Dragon. In the case of specific champions, it can mean getting more Control Wards when Evelynn is in the game. There's a lot to this kind of gameplay that is subtle and varied enough to warrant expanding upon, including at the expense of purely micro-focused gameplay.

I also find it confusing that you would believe Warwick is exceptionally reliable in fights when a) this isn't true, as evidenced by most clips featuring Warwick frequently getting kited, blown up, or otherwise outplayed as he does his thing, and b) there are many more champions out there who have the same kind of "reliability" Warwick does, i.e. high autoattack damage, including several that you play, yet which you don't seem to take issue with. Why aren't you criticizing Trundle, a champion you play, for having damage that is exclusively point-and-click and stat-based? Why aren't you criticizing Illaoi, who can bully melee champions far too reliably? What about any kind of marksman, whose autoattacks exceed Warwick's in power, yet who apply those autoattacks from a much longer distance? It's this inconsistency that makes it feel like your issue comes from your own personal dislike of Warwick, rather than a unified design philosophy.

{quoted}

He doesn't have much presence in pro-play rather because of meta not favoring him as much.

He's really, really strong, and so at all elos. In most cases, this in itself is enough to make a champion pick-or-ban in pro play.

{quoted}

He's closer to older champions in that he unlike some newer champions still has some clear weaknesses.

So then, Warwick has weaknesses? More so than some newer champions? And this is enough to knock him out of pro play? Yet you still hate his design? How does that add up?

{quoted}

At the end, the only moment I showed some pride and arrogance is that last comment. The rest of earlier downvotes is simply people disagreeing and it's not something new around here. But I admit I have some pride in my understanding of games, because I simply analyze pretty much all games I play and I actually looking to becoming game developer in the future, but that's besides a point. Either way I'm sorry for the tone of my comments.

No worries, and I too have sometimes had that feeling where I tried to argue an unpopular opinion and felt vindicated when I got knee-jerk downvoted by salty players. I also very much dislike the Reddit-style practice of downvoting out of simple disagreement on here, and I don't think any of your posts, with the possible exception of your last, deserved to be downvoted, certainly not your first on here. No offense taken, and apologies as well for coming off a little aggressive in that last reply. :)

{quoted}

That being said nobody here really tried to find compromise. All we did was stating why we think WW is fine or not. I just wanted the fact that he can without enemy having to much to say kill him acknowledged. I on the other hand only implied that I accept that there is something that can be done against him regardless of it's nature, so sorry for that and let me admit that now. Yes there is some different forms of counterplay and he's not completely reliable. But as I said earlier that simply not enough. So may I ask if you see some possible solutions to this or if my suggestion about evening things out and making every champion have both of these types of counterplay is fine?

I don't necessarily think every disagreement has to be answered by meeting somewhere along the middle, but I can definitely agree that there's improvement to be found anywhere. In Warwick's particular case, I feel nerfing his sustain might already put him on a path where he's much less likely to win duels, and where he'd offer more opportunities for his opponents to kill him, but in addition to this I've also wanted to implement the following mechanical changes to him:

Completely tie his sustain to his innate, so that he has exactly zero self-healing when above his threshold, and then gains exactly the same healing on every strike when below it (so that he's more clearly vulnerable and can't use Q to burst heal).
Nerf his Q and ult damage so that they literally just operate as extra autoattacks, with no AP ratio or max health damage, and adjust the rest of his damage as necessary, so that his damage remains consistent. This should also include having him just autoattack his target normally while suppressing them, and factoring in his attack speed at the time.
Change his E away from damage reduction, so that Warwick turns a portion of all the damage he takes while E is active into gray health, which instantly heals him for his gray health once he howls. This should make the amount of damage he reduces much clearer than a simple percentage, and would make him much more vulnerable to burst.

Overall, I do think Warwick does have a certain amount of micro counterplay, because him painting himself as an easy target while he DPSes you to death at point-blank range (and it really is DPS, as he really does not have burst) makes him vulnerable to all sorts of harmful effects.

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

I don't defend any champion and I'm just ready to attack any champion. I know Illaois issues very well since she's actually my main and I know she's toxic AF and I want to see actually big rework for her in the future that will give all THREE types of counterplay (I'll give you that, you got me there). The reason why right now I attack WWs design is specifically because I think he's far from perfect which is against popular believe. I think every champion should get some changes even the healthiest one right now and WW is not a exception. I don't feel like anything was proved to me outside of that he has macro counterplay. He may have also some micro counterplay, but I still think it's to situational. I don't say make everything in his kit a skillshot nor that he should have amount of micro counterplay that new Irelia has (although I still think her W and ult might be slightly to easy to land). Just give him a little bit more in the micro aspect.

Regarding champions that only have micro counterplay my critique still applies here. If WW can get screwed by macro, then they also deserve it.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

The reason why right now I attack WWs design is specifically because I think he's far from perfect which is against popular believe.

I can agree that he's not literally perfect, but as far as designs go he is objectively one of the better-received ones. That in itself, i.e. the fact that Warwick is perceived by most of League's playerbase as a healthy champion, is evidence enough that he is designed well. By contrast, you have stated Warwick to be "the most uninteractive of all VGUs lately", and that his current counterplay is even worse than that of his old kit. There is a difference between pointing out the flaws in a champion, and making hyperbolic statements about their gameplay that are disproven by evidence, a difference you do not seem to be making.

{quoted}

I think every champion should get some changes even the healthiest one right now and WW is not a exception.

Sure, but once more, the issue is not that you criticized Warwick (I criticized Warwick in my very first post here as well, for example, and was still received well), or that you suggested changes, but that you completely bashed on a design using arguments that were completely unconvincing. You did not suggest any changes in your first reply here, nor was your criticism constructive in any manner.

{quoted}

I don't feel like anything was proved to me outside of that he has macro counterplay.

... except when your central point was that Warwick was exceptionally lacking in counterplay, this directly disproves your claim.

{quoted}

He may have also some micro counterplay, but I still think it's to situational.

Emphasis on "I still think" in that sentence. You seem to think Warwick's mechanical counterplay is too situational. Most people clearly don't.

{quoted}

I don't say make everything in his kit a skillshot nor that he should have amount of micro counterplay that new Irelia has (although I still think her W and ult might be slightly to easy to land). Just give him a little bit more in the micro aspect.

You literally suggested making his Q a skillshot, and continue to demonstrate a limited understanding of mechanical counterplay by exclusively bringing up that mechanic as an example of counterplay. I remember asking you very clearly what exact counterplay you expected from Warwick, beyond just the micro/macro separation, and what you felt appropriate to change on him in order to enable that, yet you have not yet provided an answer.

{quoted}

Regarding champions that only have micro counterplay my critique still applies here. If WW can get screwed by macro, then they also deserve it.

Okay, but then you realize this would then apply to literally dozens upon dozens of League champions? Again, perhaps you're right in this respect, but your criticism of Warwick used relative terms and comparisons to different kits, suggesting you really do hold him in lower regard than the majority of most other champions. How exactly is that consistent with the blanket criticisms you're throwing here?

AuurunApr 19, 20181 votes

Yes, I hold him in lower regard than no really most, but lots of other champions. Reason why I prefer mechanical counterplay and think is healthier for the game is simply because you can exploit it in almost all situations regardless if that's 1v1 or teamfight, lane or jungle or whatever while mcaro counterplay is only relevant in some situations. Yes I don't have any concrete ideas as to how exactly change him, but showed few examples. Or rather I have, but it would be better to just make rework concept post at this point and even that seems pointless when RIOT hardly ever uses anything from that. So I just present my opinion as to what is wrong with WW. He can win 1v1 by stats and that doesn't feel fair.

Also they get more things after rework. Maybe they are kept weak statistically or their unreliability stops them form being on top, but pretty much every rework resulted in champion gaining much more mechanics and effects in his kit. Irelia now has quite a lot of AOE including stun, disarm, way more mobility and so on. Warwick seems like the most reliable one of recent VGUs and his kit is fairly simple. He gained some things, but looking at peoples reactions he's not considered overload that much compared to others.

You bring that I suggested his Q to be skillshot and treat it like it's something wrong. I literally gave some ideas as to how to handle possible problems that could arise from that. And even then I tried to take your opinion into consideration and changes you proposed so I left his Q alone and suggested change to his W which has no active use while in combat. Of course such changes could warrant some more adjustments, but I don't believe WW cannot have micro counterplay. But I guess this discussion is pointless. I said that I'm not going to change my mind, but let rephrase that. It's unlikely that I can change my mind cause I already heard pretty much all arguments presented in this conversation earlier in my time of playing league and non of them is convincing to me.

And maybe most people think his micro counterplay is not too situational, but this is forum where many people still look through nostalgia googles and often defend any outdated design. They simply like that he's so similar to the old one. When Irelias rework was shown I even saw comment saying that she has basically all good things about WWs rework and on top of that doesn't make her as obnoxious to fight against her as WW.

Seems like you're also just going to catch me by the words and not going to change mind regardless of arguments (you're probably going to say that I don't have any good arguments anyway, even tho you said earlier I made some good points, but I won't be surprised if that was just you trying to be nice back then.). So it's better to end this here. Just last time I say what is my problem with him. There are situations where WW will just stat check you in a 1v1 situation, while many other champions can be outplayed regardless of situation and that's unfair in my eyes (feel like I have to point that out that it's just my opinion and I really don't even expect him to change any time soon, so I will just hope for nerfs for that guy). I'm fine with either making him just like the rest more micro focused, or giving him little bit of micro counterplay and giving other champions some macro counterplay. I'm fine with whatever skill could be targeted for changes. At the end of the day it's up to RIOT how they would change him and my point is simply he should have some micro counterplay in a 1v1 scenario when he's already close to enemy.

If you still disagree and think that he's completely fair in every situation and think that my arguments where unconvincing then we will have to agree to disagree, because you arguments where also unconvincing to me (basically you say you think his counterplay is completely fine and that other people also think this way). I just hope future reworks will be closer to that of Irelia rather than WW or Eve.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Reason why I prefer mechanical counterplay and think is healthier for the game is simply because you can exploit it in almost all situations regardless if that's 1v1 or teamfight, lane or jungle or whatever while mcaro counterplay is only relevant in some situations.

This is only true if you don't evaluate macro counterplay properly. In the end, if you get caught alone against a duelist, that is because you put yourself in that situation, so it is something you could have entirely prevented. Similarly, for any bad situation you're in, there are generally several tactical options at your disposal to mitigate your opponent's power, namely any kind of positioning. Because of this, I think the reverse is true, and both strategic and tactical counterplay tend to be valid in more situations than mechanical counterplay, especially since so many recent mechanics expect a champion to have a gapcloser or Flash at the ready.

{quoted}

Also they get more things after rework. Maybe they are kept weak statistically or their unreliability stops them form being on top, but pretty much every rework resulted in champion gaining much more mechanics and effects in his kit. Irelia now has quite a lot of AOE including stun, disarm, way more mobility and so on.

Irelia already had a stun, mobility and an AoE in her previous kit. Sure, she now also has a disarm, and can use her Q more frequently, but she lost a lot of other forms of power along the way, including a point-and-click slow, self-healing on her basic attacks and ult, true damage, and so on. Sure, she has more things to do, but that's a good thing, and ultimately she didn't gain all of those bonuses out of thin air, so much as trade off some of her old power and reliability for them. The same goes for any other VGU.

{quoted}

Warwick seems like the most reliable one of recent VGUs and his kit is fairly simple. He gained some things, but looking at peoples reactions he's not considered overload that much compared to others.

Indeed, which is why you mentioning kit overload here has no bearing on Warwick's evaluation. In fact, Warwick lost quite a few things with his VGU, including full vision of targets, an AoE attack speed buff to allies, his old point-and-click blink, which is now a much less reliable dash, and his always-on healing on his innate. He has damage reduction, some unstoppability and a fear, but at the end of the day he is one of the least loaded modern designs in the game, which is one more reason why I personally think he's so well-designed.

{quoted}

You bring that I suggested his Q to be skillshot and treat it like it's something wrong. I literally gave some ideas as to how to handle possible problems that could arise from that.

Except my point was that I questioned the very need to make Q a skillshot, whereas you simply jumped to that suggestion immediately, and only then attempted to justify yourself. That's not how you design in response to a problem. What I am trying to tell you is to have you ask yourself what specific counterplay you think Warwick is lacking, and what can be done to answer that in an appropriate manner. Just saying "X champion lacks counterplay, let's just randomly make this ability a skillshot" is not really the deepest kind of analysis you can make here.

{quoted}

And even then I tried to take your opinion into consideration and changes you proposed so I left his Q alone and suggested change to his W which has no active use while in combat.

Except his W already has some use in combat, due to how it can be activated to grant Warwick a temporary movement speed boost. Where were you getting a different impression?

{quoted}

Of course such changes could warrant some more adjustments, but I don't believe WW cannot have micro counterplay.

Sure, but micro counterplay is, yet again, more than just skillshots. This is why I am asking you to evaluate whether a skillshot is really the answer here, because I feel you're ignoring a lot of other mechanics that could also answer the same problem, including the mechanical counterplay already present in WW's kit, namely on his E and ult.

{quoted}

And maybe most people think his micro counterplay is not too situational, but this is forum where many people still look through nostalgia googles and often defend any outdated design.

... which may likely include you, as you have been the only one to prefer WW's old design over his new one. Moreover, asking for a design to not stray too far from the original I don't think is really a matter of nostalgia, so much as a matter of players enjoying a certain playstyle and wanting to keep on playing it, as long as it can be made healthy. Warwick's rework was lauded not just for being close to his original kit, but for taking all of what was good in his original self, and bringing it to modern standards of healthy design, both for him and his opponents.

{quoted}

Seems like you're also just going to catch me by the words and not going to change mind regardless of arguments (you're probably going to say that I don't have any good arguments anyway, even tho you said earlier I made some good points, but I won't be surprised if that was just you trying to be nice back then.).

Actually, I've been saying you've made some good points, and I agree with several of the things you have said. At no point have I said that you've made no good arguments, and in fact it is you who said to me that the arguments I made were only good in my own mind. You are projecting quite transparently here.

{quoted}

So it's better to end this here. Just last time I say what is my problem with him. There are situations where WW will just stat check you in a 1v1 situation, while many other champions can be outplayed regardless of situation and that's unfair in my eyes (feel like I have to point that out that it's just my opinion and I really don't even expect him to change any time soon, so I will just hope for nerfs for that guy).

Which other champions can be outplayed "regardless of situation"? If there are so many, naming even just a handful of examples should be no trouble, yet you have mentioned exactly none so far.

{quoted}

If you still disagree and think that he's completely fair in every situation and think that my arguments where unconvincing then we will have to agree to disagree, because you arguments where also unconvincing to me (basically you say you think his counterplay is completely fine and that other people also think this way). I just hope future reworks will be closer to that of Irelia rather than WW or Eve.

You are free to disagree, but the problem here is that your opinion here stems really from just your own personal opinion, as well as claims that are unsubstantiated and divergent from general opinion. By contrast, when I say that Warwick is generally perceived as fair (and you'll notice I base my claims on perception and opinion, rather than some ultimate objective truth), that is something that can be verified just by looking here, and at any other place where Warwick's design is discussed. If you personally don't think Warwick is fair, that is your own opinion to hold, and I'm not going to say that opinion is invalid, but when you're trying to tell me that Warwick is objectively not fair, and that everyone who says otherwise is biased or ignorant, that's another matter entirely, one I will argue against.

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

And also... It's not that nice to paint me as some prick that ignores what others may say. Just because I didn't give much opportunities to observe how I change my mind in discussions with other doesn't mean I completely incapable of compromise. My opinion on League is heavily influenced by other people posts honestly including your posts.

I don't think you're a prick at all; you've just said now multiple times that, on this point at least, you really don't want to change your opinion, no matter the amount of contrary evidence or reasoning presented to you, which I think is not only completely inappropriate to any kind of constructive discussion, but also entirely wasteful and disrespectful to the people you are arguing with. From what I gather, this is the only real point where you behave like this, so I'm not accusing you of doing this all the time, but it's clear in this particular situation that you came in with a chip on your shoulder, and your previous response here felt like venting towards people who argued against you, rather than acknowledging that your attitude towards this discussion has been detrimental.

If you really, honestly believe nothing will change your opinion on a certain topic, you have no business engaging in arguments relating to that topic, because the purpose of any kind of civil debate is to try to arrive towards the truth, and so convince one side or the other (or both) of a perspective that differs from theirs. If you cannot accept a different perspective, at least on this subject, you are simply not fit to engage in civil debate, as you are not upholding your part of the agreement in keeping an open mind. I may be coming across as rude here, but I'm not trying to attack you or your person: sometimes, when in a certain mood, it simply is better to pick one's battles and choose to avoid certain topics of discussion, even if one feels strongly about them (in fact, especially if one feels strongly about them, in cases like these). I do think you've made some good points in your responses here, but as long as you refuse to acknowledge that your opinion can and should change in the face of evidence and solid reasoning, this kind of argument is unlikely to ever become as productive as it could be.

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

Problem is you think what you presented is a solid reasoning and evidence and think this is enough or that I didn't showed to much of that. But the fact is whenever champion gets a rework they also get buffed, but when you look at this logically these buffs don't come from the very nature of skill being a skillshot (at lest most of the time as being able to check bushes is natural for skillshots) and when you see that reliable champions often can be kept in the gutter compared to others it's crystal clear that unreliable ones gets buffed to simply compete or outright keep older ones not viable. Then also is the fact that many players feel bad when playing against these overloaded champions that can cover their weaknesses and that's completely valid. That's why I want to even out amounts of counterplay and also types of counterplay. Since WW is able to stat check enemy completely that shows he's still to much into tactical and strategical gameplay and too little in mechanical one.

Maybe your ideas of making him further into DPS champ could help, but then on top of that I would suggest maybe even leaving his Q alone, but giving him some sort of unreliable damage skill that has to be used multiple times in a fight in order to win on his W while in combat. Seriously not having one of abilities completely in certain situations feels awful to play as. Also regarding this penalty of landing his ult at point blank you can also look at this the other way, bonus reward for landing long distance ult. This is something I thought should be a thing from the moment I saw his release, before even I gave any more thought into his kit.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Problem is you think what you presented is a solid reasoning and evidence and think this is enough or that I didn't showed to much of that. But the fact is whenever champion gets a rework they also get buffed,

No, they don't. Frequently, champions in need of a rework are kept deliberately weak to avoid having too much presence, but the primary goal of a rework is not to buff a champion. Sion, Warwick and Irelia are all clear examples of VGUs whose post-relaunch strength wasn't all that great.

{quoted}

it's crystal clear that unreliable ones gets buffed to simply compete or outright keep older ones not viable.

Once more, this is self-evidently true. Reliability is a strength, so removing reliability involves adding power somewhere else if you want a champion to be balanced. Unreliability is not the same as kit overload, either, and you seem to be confusing the two here.

{quoted}

Since WW is able to stat check enemy completely that shows he's still to much into tactical and strategical gameplay and too little in mechanical one.

Except he doesn't stat check enemies, and is in fact known to be one of the very few champions with his playstyle who doesn't rely on pure stats to win fights. As you yourself pointed out, he legitimately has tools at his disposal that he can use to impact on combat, and him outplaying his opponent is what can make or break a fight, which is the opposite of a stat check.

{quoted}

Seriously not having one of abilities completely in certain situations feels awful to play as.

Warwick's incredibly powerful self-healing and attack speed steroid are both locked behind certain health thresholds, yet this is a large part of what makes him feel so exciting to play. This is one of those instances where you're taking your own personal feelings regarding a design point, and are projecting them onto everyone else.

{quoted}

Also regarding this penalty of landing his ult at point blank you can also look at this the other way, bonus reward for landing long distance ult.

Except both the rewards and penalties inherent in using Warwick's ult at different ranges already exist in a manner that is clearly identifiable, even if it's not literally spelled out to the player. Anybody who uses Warwick's ult knows that dashing from a distance is riskier, but cooler, whereas ulting at point-blank range is more reliable, but rarely optimal. This is one of the reasons why I personally think Warwick's design is so brilliant, because it implicitly offers choice and nuanced gameplay without having to make every single decision point a separate passive or conditional, a la Thresh or Kalista. It is, effectively, a way of generating a lot of depth with fairly simple mechanics, which answers the problem you gave of overloaded kits.

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Then explain what I don't understand. Counterplay is not a strenght or weakness, it's a design rule. The moment some champions got a ability to be outplayed regardless of who they are facing it shoulr be applied to everyone. Playing by the same rules is the most important thing in games and ot seems you are the one not understanding this.

Actually, HarrisonOwns is right, and the issue here seems to be that you're running on a very narrow and limited notion of counterplay. Counterplay isn't simply dodging skillshots, it can involve larger decision-making over the course of a fight (i.e. tactical counterplay), or even plans across the timeline of a match (i.e. strategic counterplay). If, for example, the enemy team has a lot of duelists, your best bet is to group together more frequently and ward the jungle, so that one rarely finds themselves alone. If a champion in particular can reliably damage you at melee range, but takes time to kill you and leaves themselves fully exposed for the duration, as is the case for Warwick, there are many ways you can respond to deal with them, such as by moving out of range, placing them out of range with crowd control, or exploiting the easy target to hit them with quicker bursts of damage. Not every champion needs to be a duelist in order for the game to have counterplay, and being able to outplay an opponent 1v1 does not mean you're going to be able to have the same agency in teamfight or more macro play.

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

But having more counterplay on micro scale and having champions to be able to outplay each other also doesn't take away from macroplay. If all that decides a fight is being in the right place at the right time it's going to become unfair at some point, because bumping into someone you can kill somewhere on the map may happen by strike of luck. That's why we need to also have fighting aspect to give not favored champion some chances to turn this around.

League nowadays is basically hybrid of strategy and fighting games. However champions like WW destroy one of these aspects and taking away option to fight based on skill doesn't make strategy aspect better. It's just taking the other option away. For me MOBA games always lacked strategy as most of them just stripped down RTS games from mechanics and didn't add anything new to the table outside of multiplayer so that people instead of being encouraged to cooperate they are forced to rely on each other.

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

But having more counterplay on micro scale and having champions to be able to outplay each other also doesn't take away from macroplay. If all that decides a fight is being in the right place at the right time it's going to become unfair at some point, because bumping into someone you can kill somewhere on the map may happen by strike of luck. That's why we need to also have fighting aspect to give not favored champion some chances to turn this around.

Sure, but Warwick's counterplay isn't solely defined by being at the right place at the right time, since once again, there are several portions to his counterplay that occur in sequence. Micro play may not take away from macro play, but I do certainly think it's possible for champions to fall more towards one end than the other when defining their counterplay. Katarina's counterplay, for example, is almost completely micro-focused, whereas most of Ashe's counterplay happens on a much more macro scale. League is particular among MOBAs in that it's mostly become focused on micro play, but Dota 2 and HotS both have great examples of champions whose gameplay is almost purely tactical or strategic, rather than mechanical. There is room for this kind of counterplay in League, and in this respect Warwick is a good example of a champion with an exceptional amount of tactical gameplay.

{quoted}

League nowadays is basically hybrid of strategy and fighting games. However champions like WW destroy one of these aspects and taking away option to fight based on skill doesn't make strategy aspect better.

How exactly does Warwick "take away the option to fight based on skill"? If nothing else, I'd say WW actually fits into the fighting game aspect quite well, because his Q can be used at the right time to avoid CC at point-blank range, where most other melee champions end up just being screwed over. Even Primal Howl has, at the very least, a 1-second delay before it can be reactivated, which is much more time to react than many other skillshots and ground-targeted abilities (both of which are themselves countered by mobility).

{quoted}

For me MOBA games always lacked strategy as most of them just stripped down RTS games from mechanics and didn't add anything new to the table outside of multiplayer so that people instead of being encouraged to cooperate they are forced to rely on each other.

This is a separate issue entirely, one I agree with in League's case (its strategic gameplay has faded over the seasons), but I don't think it's true for all MOBAs. Again, if you check out characters in Heroes of the Storm like Zagara, who summons units Starcraft-style, The Lost Vikings, a multi-unit hero (also Meepo in Dota 2), Abathur, Sylvanas, etc., you'll find that strategic gameplay is alive and well in the genre. It's possible to have rich macro gameplay without necessarily having to micromanage hundreds or dozens of units at a time, and the multiplayer component itself, if implemented well, can enrich this gameplay further and introduce more emergence.

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

How exactly does Warwick "take away the option to fight based on skill"? If nothing else, I'd say WW actually fits into the fighting game aspect quite well, because his Q can be used at the right time to avoid CC at point-blank range, where most other melee champions end up just being screwed over. Even Primal Howl has, at the very least, a 1-second delay before it can be reactivated, which is much more time to react than many other skillshots and ground-targeted abilities (both of which are themselves countered by mobility).

He gets outplay potential which is a good thing absolutely, but doesn't give his enemy option to outplay his damage and CC. When you create a game and include in it both strategy and fighting aspect you shouldn't create champions and fit the only in one part of it. Both aspects should be visible in every champion. Otherwise your game characters play by different rules all together and may some people feel bad when playing it. I for example even knowing about what can be done against WW I still feel cheated when he kills me since he has to worry only about macro, while I as some champions have to worry about both macro and micro.

Also I don't consider DOTA2 and HOTS that good of a games. Honestly for me HOTS is just a game where any wacky stupid design can make it's way into, so I can't tread this game seriously. I don't even see that much depth in them so yeah... Although I admit still more that Lol.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

He gets outplay potential which is a good thing absolutely, but doesn't give his enemy option to outplay his damage and CC.

Except, as mentioned above, there are plenty of mechanics at your disposal on practically every champion in the game that allow you to outplay Warwick, along with mechanical outplays anybody can perform to mess up his ability usage. You're being awfully specific on what perceived lack of counterplay you're criticizing at this point, and it really feels like you're trying to shift the goalposts to this argument after just having been shown how Warwick has counterplay.

{quoted}

I for example even knowing about what can be done against WW I still feel cheated when he kills me since he has to worry only about macro, while I as some champions have to worry about both macro and micro.

The issue here simply feels like you don't like dying to Warwick, period, and you seem to be attributing rightfully earned deaths to him as unfair, purely on the grounds that you dislike Warwick and think he has no counterplay no matter what. It is this mentality that is only making your problems worse, because you are utterly refusing to admit to any misplays of your own, and are therefore refusing to grow and adapt in order to beat Warwick. Again, Warwick has no competitive presence, so if at least one bracket of players have found out how to reliably outplay him, the power is certainly in your hands as well.

{quoted}

Also I don't consider DOTA2 and HOTS that good of a games. Honestly for me HOTS is just a game where any wacky stupid design can make it's way into, so I can't tread this game seriously. I don't even see that much depth in them so yeah... Although I admit still more that Lol.

Sure, but your opinion of these games is entirely irrelevant to the argument. Both of these games are MOBAs, and in fact both of these games are MOBAs that work, as evidenced by their substantial and still-growing playerbases. You may not take those games seriously, but that does not permit you to sweep them under the rug when they just so happen to undermine your the design philosophy you are trying to expound.

AuurunApr 19, 20181 votes

Last time. I don't say there's NOTHING that can be done against him. But there's not enough in certain type of situation. Simple at is. I don't like Warwick? My critique comes from the fact that I believe he has clear weaknesses, great feel and is close to being almost perfect champion. I really want to like him, playing as him and against him, but whenever I get attacked by him even if I win it doesn't feel fair or fun to play against him. Some times you have to take risk and go somewhere by yourself and push or something. When he gets here to fight you all you have left is focus on using your kit as effectively as possible and hope that;s enough. Many other champions still gives you then some room to outplay, or just buy some time even when they manage to outplay your CC and damage. This is fair champion. This a kind of champion that makes this game fun for me. A champion that even if on macro scale manages to outplay me he still has to do the same on micro scale and prove it was something more than just strike of luck. There's no reason why Warwick cannot have unique micro counterplay. His macro aspect won't be any more less important than it is already. But it seems like you just don't like the idea of him having anything of this nature at all even if RIOT has found a fitting form of micro counterplay. I don't refuse to acknowledge the existence of his counterplay and has already admitted it multiple times. I also said that I'm fine with him having less mechanical counterplay than others and being more macro focused than others. At the end of the day it seems like the thing we disagree in is whether he's too focused on macro (my opinion) or not (your opinion). I don't have any malicious intent and it's not like I completely hate this guy, in fact there many other champions that I dislike way more than WW. I just think he can generate some unnecessary frustration even tho he doesn't have to and that it's kind of waste of potential.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Last time. I don't say there's NOTHING that can be done against him. But there's not enough in certain type of situation.

When? How? Every example you have given where you supposedly had no option against Warwick, it was pointed out to you that you did, in fact, have many choices at your disposal, and that you lost because you misplayed, rather than because WW himself lacks counterplay.

{quoted}

Simple at is. I don't like Warwick? My critique comes from the fact that I believe he has clear weaknesses, great feel and is close to being almost perfect champion.

... yet you say he's worse than the Old Warwick, a notoriously poor design, and that you dislike him more than a great deal many other champions. Again, it feels like you're being inconsistent here purely for the sake of being contrarian.

{quoted}

A champion that even if on macro scale manages to outplay me he still has to do the same on micro scale and prove it was something more than just strike of luck.

... so good macro play is just luck to you? That may be why you've been disregarding it so much throughout this exchange.

{quoted}

There's no reason why Warwick cannot have unique micro counterplay.

Why? Again, your argument is that he seems to lack a very specific type of counterplay, and my question to that is: why is this important? How is Warwick's counterplay overall, and is his overall counterplay lacking? Personally, I don't think so, because in addition to some amount of mechanical counterplay, he has amazing tactical interactivity, in addition to some level of strategic counterplay. Not every champion needs to have the exact same counterplay across those three aspects, and the very fact that you've been splitting gameplay types into two, whereas I've been splitting them into three (and so with justification, imo), I think demonstrates how arbitrary it is to focus on one aspect of a champion's gameplay in a vacuum.

{quoted}

But it seems like you just don't like the idea of him having anything of this nature at all even if RIOT has found a fitting form of micro counterplay.

How exactly are you getting this impression when I specifically told you to look into what kind of micro counterplay Warwick should have? Why would I do this if I were to categorically refuse giving him any micro counterplay? Sure, I don't think Warwick needs more mechanical counterplay, but if adding that can make him healthier and more fun, then I'd fully support it. I just don't think giving him another skillshot would achieve that, and so precisely because it's not congruent to his general gameplay and pattern of interaction.

{quoted}

I don't refuse to acknowledge the existence of his counterplay and has already admitted it multiple times.

... except you've promptly dismissed all that by focusing exclusively on one type of counterplay you think Warwick lacks, ignoring entirely the other forms of counterplay that had just been pointed out. You seem to think these different forms of counterplay are isolated from each other, when in practice they absolutely aren't.

{quoted}

I also said that I'm fine with him having less mechanical counterplay than others and being more macro focused than others. At the end of the day it seems like the thing we disagree in is whether he's too focused on macro (my opinion) or not (your opinion).

Sure, except as you've shown, your own evaluation of Warwick's overall counterplay, as well as your own opinion on macro counterplay and what constitutes too much focus, are based on a very minoritary opinion, itself heavily influenced by an apparent lack of consideration towards macro play. You've given several examples of you getting outplayed due to mistakes you made at the tactical or strategic level, and the problem here is that you've been told how you could've played better, and how Warwick exploited your mistakes to win, yet you've continued to ignore that and keep on posting about how Warwick doesn't give sufficient outplay options. Perhaps Warwick doesn't give you sufficient outplay options, and that's valid, but the general consensus is that he does give opportunities for outplays to most players otherwise. You are free to say you personally have trouble dealing with Warwick, which seems to be the real issue here, but that is not the same as saying Warwick objectively lacks counterplay, micro or otherwise, as a whole.

Teridax68Apr 18, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Having something telegraphed does not mean it's fair. There are situations when you don't have turrets or allies nearby and then what does it matter that I know he's coming if I know he's just gonna statcheck me.

Sure, a thing can be telegraphed and still unfair, but in the end, if you went out in the jungle alone and at low health, knowing that Warwick outduels you and could be around at any point, then you simply played poorly, and walked straight into a situation you should have well known you would lose. In just the situation you described, there were many counters at your disposal, such as warding, staying near allies, or using Flash, all of which could have significantly aided you in avoiding that death.

{quoted}

Basically what you saying is that his counterplay is don't be alone and stay out of range which is a type of gameplay that should simply die out. And as I said in a 1v1 scenario sacrificing his gap closing power of his ult is not a big deal.

No, based on what I said, the counterplay to Warwick is to dodge his ult if he uses it from a distance, or alternatively use the telegraphing he provides to prepare for his arrival. Practically every champion has crowd control and mobility at their disposal, and those that do not, i.e. Kog'Maw, are typically designed to be reliant on allies, and frequently instead have heavy range and damage to compensate. All of these are tools you can use to your advantage against Warwick, and every choice he makes offers an appropriate response you can enact to counter him. Just to go back to his E, for example, if you take even a step in the "wrong" direction for Warwick, you can stop him from corralling you into the enemy laner, and can instead have him fear you into a direction that works much worse for him. Even when he is near you, unless you are already very low on health, Warwick's lack of burst means he offers a significant window of time where you can fight back against him. You act as if Warwick is this CC immune, invulnerable monster who is a guaranteed death sentence the moment he is in range of you, when this is clearly not the case. Warwick is certainly too strong right now, but he is certainly not lacking in counterplay, and to me it seems more like your issues with him lie with your inability to understand his counterplay, and your refusal to look for improvement in yourself, rather than his own design problems.

{quoted}

Also I think abilities like his E as in "something happens around your champion" are problematic. Even if they are delayed since you know where they gonna come from it boils down to "you have enough mobility to get out of range or not".

If the effect is a constant proximity check like Sunfire Cape, then sure, but PBAoEs that occur once per cast and have a substantial cooldown have much more gameplay than you give them credit for. Darius's Q can be mitigated by positioning into his inner circle, for example, and you can see plenty of examples of low-mobility champions outplaying him that way. Warwick's E has even more counterplay in that the movement vector induced by the fear can be completely disrupted by even the slightest change in positioning, allowing players to mess up Warwick's positioning simply by walking to the right place at the right time. It is not simply a question of having mobility (if only because CC can affect these abilities as well), but rather one of positioning properly, both for Warwick and his opponent.

{quoted}

I don't mind champions having some reliability, but it should always be absolute minimum. If I were to call Warwick healthy champion at the very least he should get actual penalty damage wise if he uses his ult on point blank range

Why? What's wrong with losing a large gapcloser in exchange for some reliability?

{quoted}

and his Q should be turn into a skillshot or given some other unique type of counterplay that would allow to completely negate it's effect regardless of situation.

Again, why? What exactly is the counterplay you are trying to achieve? You seem to be under the impression that counterplay is simply a thing one can slap willy-nilly onto a champion in order to improve them without negative consequences, when the reality is much less simplistic. When a champion is given counterplay, that counterplay typically has a general theme and set of counters behind it, all of which play in relation to the champion's intended strengths. Why does the counterplay to Warwick's Q have to be a skillshot? What do you think Warwick's counterplay should be, what do you think he should be good at, and how are you planning to go about enacting those goals via his gameplay?

AuurunApr 18, 20181 votes

What I want is simply being able to outplay him in 1v1 situation just like he can when i play for example Illaoi or Sion. That's all I want to achieve and it's valuable in of itself. I want this game be fair at all stages. What's wrong with loosing a gap closer for some reliability is that sometimes gap closer is not necessary to win simple as that.

And it's more simplistic than you think. You can simply add counterplay to a champion without much problem if you do it right. If you fear that by making his Q skillshot he will loose one of his weaknesses namely lack of escape then just use a mechanic that Camille has on her E which makes her have more range when jumping toward champions. You can actually make his Q only usable in the general direction of champions and minions to keep it as close to the current version as you can. Regarding him choosing to land in front of or behind a champion we can use Kleds E mechanic that lets him recast E to dash to to champion he has hit.

Currently since he doesn't have much problem using his combo in most efficient way in 1v1 scenario all the counterplay is the same as say Garen. Stay near allies, don't walk on low health, use flash. Far from enough.

Also I forgot back then to mention Darius. His Q is the only spell like that that IMO is healthy. Most abilities like that only gives you one way to avoid, get out, but his Q gives you two ways to avoid it's damage and therefore there are some mind games and possible outplay potential involved. In WWs E case it's not that good cause once again counterplay you described here only applies when you have allies near and so is too situational.

You can always add counterplay to a champion and there's nothing point and clicks can achieve what skillshots cannot with enough work.

By the way I'm sorry that I replied here little bit backwards... I thought my first reply here will be enough, but after reading you comments once again I felt a need to point some things out.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

What I want is simply being able to outplay him in 1v1 situation just like he can when i play for example Illaoi or Sion. That's all I want to achieve and it's valuable in of itself. I want this game be fair at all stages.

You already can, as neither Sion nor Illaoi are at a particular disadvantage against him. Both have ample opportunity to counter him as well: Illaoi can exploit his melee and DPS reliance to generate tentacles against him and burst him down, whereas Sion can hamper his effectiveness through lots of different CC types. It's also worth mentioning that Sion is a tank, and so is neither meant to deal a particularly large amount of damage himself, nor be a good duelist. Warwick, on the other hand, has the damage and tools to duel. You need to accept that winning a fight against a champion 1v1 is not the be-all and end-all to counterplay, and that a game can be fair even when you're in a situation where you lose duels.

{quoted}

What's wrong with loosing a gap closer for some reliability is that sometimes gap closer is not necessary to win simple as that.

And that's a bad thing... why? If Warwick managed to not use his ult as a gapcloser, yet could still run up to you and kill you, he clearly did something right.

{quoted}

And it's more simplistic than you think. You can simply add counterplay to a champion without much problem if you do it right. If you fear that by making his Q skillshot he will loose one of his weaknesses namely lack of escape then just use a mechanic that Camille has on her E which makes her have more range when jumping toward champions. You can actually make his Q only usable in the general direction of champions and minions to keep it as close to the current version as you can. Regarding him choosing to land in front of or behind a champion we can use Kleds E mechanic that lets him recast E to dash to to champion he has hit.

You literally just ignored everything I pointed out and asked to you, just to reiterate the same point that had just been disproven. What do you have to say about respecting a champion's intended theme and niche? What about the drawbacks of adding contradictory counterplay? Again, you appear to be relying on your self-proclaimed expertise on design here as an excuse to avoid salient criticism of your points, yet in doing so are demonstrating a large degree of ignorance of many design points that many more people on here are aware of.

{quoted}

Currently since he doesn't have much problem using his combo in most efficient way in 1v1 scenario all the counterplay is the same as say Garen. Stay near allies, don't walk on low health, use flash. Far from enough.

The fact that you think Warwick's counterplay is the same as Garen's speaks volumes as to your actual knowledge of either champion. Have you actually played Warwick? What about Garen? If you really think Warwick here has so little counterplay, please, by all means, do try him out, and see for yourself how it is to actually use his kit. If he really has as little counterplay as you suggest, then with his current excessive power level you should have no trouble auto-winning ganks and duels.

{quoted}

In WWs E case it's not that good cause once again counterplay you described here only applies when you have allies near and so is too situational.

This is completely untrue. The counterplay I mentioned was that walking even a slight amount in any direction can completely mess up where Warwick directs you with his fear, an item of counterplay that is not only effective near allies and turrets, but also in any sort of situation relating to positioning. If you get Warwick to fear you towards a wall, for example, that can be your cue to dash or Flash over it, and even if you're in the middle of a lane, messing up Warwick's E means he won't get to push you into his ally or turret. If you had applied this counterplay, you would have easily noticed the advantage to it in these various situations.

{quoted}

You can always add counterplay to a champion and there's nothing point and clicks can achieve what skillshots cannot with enough work.

No. Skillshots and point-and-click effects achieve different goals and convey effects differently, and so are not interchangeable. If this were the case, every ally-targeted shield, heal or other buff could be turned into a skillshot with no repercussions, along with basic attacks. In the case of supports, the reason why they don't have more skillshots is because the intended gameplay behind using utility on allies isn't to encourage good aim, and because missing an ability intended to clutch-save an ally's life would be intensely and needlessly frustrating. Similarly, some measure of point-and-click, or otherwise reliably applied power, can be excellent in giving a champion a baseline amount of necessary reliability, when the framework for their interactivity does not rely on pinpoint precision or reflexes.

AuurunApr 19, 20181 votes

I wanted to end this with the other comment, but I have to admit that you're right regarding shields and other buffs. I should have say it a little bit differently. You can add micro counterplay to everything and keep it thematic and so on. I believe there are more types of micro counterplay than just skillshots and I don't talk about things like "position a little bit differently so he fears you where he deosn't want", I had situations and they were quite often when I didn't care where I feared my enemy when I played WW. "In the direction opposite to his ally" assuming he needs one to kill, "in the direction of a wall so you can flash over" assuming I have flash at all times. For me when game includes ability to outplay champion without basing on ones unique kit then this should to some extent apply to everyone. So yes for me ability to duel is be-all end-all.

Regarding these other forms of counterplay I mentioned it may be a lot of things. Of course many of them doesn't fit WW but can fit somewhere else. For example building on the concept of Cassiopeias ult or Tryndamere W, abilities that get blocked base on how you stand when they hit you, there may be also point and clicks that chase target like right now, but will disappear after some time an will slow down when turning so enemy can basically kite them, there can be more abilities based on interacting with something (GP, Illaoi, Poppy, Zyra), how about abilities that do something instantly but instead of doing damage they apply mark that shows how much damage you will take and you have to meet some condition to get rid of it in time. There could be probably much more and these could be possibly combined together when fit. Even shields and heals can have others unique types.

I could agree with him having gameplay based around hitting him if he also was taking increased damage at certain point in fights, but I don't see people taking such change too good and I think skillshot probably fit him the most since why being a beast that just rushes others has guarantee hitting champion? Why the hell when using Q he acts like some heat seeking missile?

I also believe that baseline of reliability is a good thing, hell, I'd say it' necessary and some champions could you a bonus reliability damage-wise in their kits like Lux for example that can only shoot shit out and get completely screwed by decent players. But in WWs case he has to much of it.

And i played him, not even once and I have to say I didn't have any problems winning ganks and duel doing basically the same thing. Maybe people I played against me have sucked, but that doesn't change the fact that id didn't feel like there's anything they could possibly do when I got to them.

With Illaoi and Sion you're acting like it's guaranteed to affect him by their kits, but both of them can still be outplayed and simply lose to him cause he really at this point can fuck up barely anything.

Teridax68Apr 19, 20181 votes

{quoted}

I believe there are more types of micro counterplay than just skillshots and I don't talk about things like "position a little bit differently so he fears you where he deosn't want",

... why not? Again, as I pointed out, this is perfectly valid counterplay, and you don't get to reject it out of hand just because you personally don't like to talk about it.

{quoted}

I had situations and they were quite often when I didn't care where I feared my enemy when I played WW. "In the direction opposite to his ally" assuming he needs one to kill, "in the direction of a wall so you can flash over" assuming I have flash at all times.

I did not assume you had Flash at all times, nor did I say that positioning in a manner that still gets you feared will always benefit you. I simply pointed out that, when you do get feared, there is still stuff any champion can do that can work in their favor against Warwick. As said above, there is a ton more you can do to mechanically outplay Warwick, as he gives plenty of opportunities for you to do so, so you really are cherry-picking which situations you can and can't win against him (and literally every champion has situations where they have the advantage, as that's a part of good design).

{quoted}

For me when game includes ability to outplay champion without basing on ones unique kit then this should to some extent apply to everyone. So yes for me ability to duel is be-all end-all.

Well then, time to remove tanks, supports and most marksmen from the game, seeing how they're not designed to be duelists, and so are practically guaranteed to lose 1v1s against many more champions in League's roster. /s

But seriously, League is a team game, not a game of 1v1s. I agree that every champion should be outplayable, including in a 1v1 situation, but that does not mean that any champion should be able to beat literally any other champion in a 1v1. Warwick fulfils the first condition, because he does offer ways for even single champions to outplay him, but as a duelist, there are many other champions, including Sion, who are simply not going to win 1v1s against him, unless something spectacularly unusual happens. This does not mean Warwick is poorly-designed, nor does it mean that League itself is poorly designed. It simply means that, if you really care only about 1v1s, then League may not be the game for you, and you may have more fun playing a game like Battlerite instead.

{quoted}

Regarding these other forms of counterplay I mentioned it may be a lot of things. Of course many of them doesn't fit WW but can fit somewhere else. For example building on the concept of Cassiopeias ult or Tryndamere W, abilities that get blocked base on how you stand when they hit you, there may be also point and clicks that chase target like right now, but will disappear after some time an will slow down when turning so enemy can basically kite them, there can be more abilities based on interacting with something (GP, Illaoi, Poppy, Zyra), how about abilities that do something instantly but instead of doing damage they apply mark that shows how much damage you will take and you have to meet some condition to get rid of it in time. There could be probably much more and these could be possibly combined together when fit. Even shields and heals can have others unique types.

I agree with this. To some extent, I think some of this could also be included on Warwick, as per my suggestions in the other comment (you could alternatively have WW's E be a shield, with the howl only activating if the shield holds, Sion-style), which is why I encourage you to look beyond just skillshots when looking to give Warwick more mechanical counterplay.

{quoted}

I could agree with him having gameplay based around hitting him if he also was taking increased damage at certain point in fights, but I don't see people taking such change too good and I think skillshot probably fit him the most since why being a beast that just rushes others has guarantee hitting champion? Why the hell when using Q he acts like some heat seeking missile?

... he's a bloodthirsty monster with the instincts of a predator. Of course he's going to make a beeline for you and bite you the moment he gets the chance. Do you see wolves or leopards throw out skillshots to hunt in real life?

{quoted}

I also believe that baseline of reliability is a good thing, hell, I'd say it' necessary and some champions could you a bonus reliability damage-wise in their kits like Lux for example that can only shoot shit out and get completely screwed by decent players. But in WWs case he has to much of it.

Why? On what basis?

{quoted}

And i played him, not even once and I have to say I didn't have any problems winning ganks and duel doing basically the same thing. Maybe people I played against me have sucked, but that doesn't change the fact that id didn't feel like there's anything they could possibly do when I got to them.

I'm sorry, how many times exactly did you play him? "Not even once" implies you played him exactly zero times, whereas you seem to be trying to say you played him more than once, even though you were consistently playing against people who did not know how to outplay him. How exactly does Warwick play like Garen again, then?

{quoted}

With Illaoi and Sion you're acting like it's guaranteed to affect him by their kits, but both of them can still be outplayed and simply lose to him cause he really at this point can fuck up barely anything.

Except Illaoi is notorious for screwing over melee champions due to her tentacles. She can be outplayed, but doing so at melee range is frequently unrealistic. It is interesting that you would come up with excuses for Illaoi, when she is notorious for lacking counterplay, yet still attack Warwick and his own interactivity, which is generally considered acceptable, including at melee range (so he can, in fact, fuck up, including when meleeing his target).

AuurunAug 14, 20181 votes

Coming back after break from Lol and thinking about your points. Still disagree. Even if it's team game every champion should be able to beat every other champion. Cool that you think at least some of this less conventional counterplay could be applied to WW, satisfied with that. Sorry for bothering after such a long time.

PS. Just because I use Illaoi as a example of good designs in some aspects doesn't mean I'm making excuses for her. I want her to get rework one day just as much as WW.

Warlord RhinarkAug 14, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Coming back after break from Lol and thinking about your points. Still disagree. Even if it's team game every champion should be able to beat every other champion. Cool that you think at least some of this less conventional counterplay could be applied to WW, satisfied with that. Sorry for bothering after such a long time.

PS. Just because I use Illaoi as a example of good designs in some aspects doesn't mean I'm making excuses for her. I want her to get rework one day just as much as WW.

Mate this was 4 months ago.

Teridax68Aug 14, 20181 votes

Welcome back, but what you're saying adds strictly nothing to this long-dead conversation, as you are simply reiterating your points. League isn't a game strictly about dueling each other, and outplaying a champion does not mean being able to kill them at any point in time.