Boards›Gameplay

Dragon should not give 5 devourer stacks

The Ecdysiast··8 votes·546 views

He's not even purple.

EDIT: This isn't a joke post. I really believe Herald and Baron are the only monsters that should give 5 stacks. They're actually difficult to get, whereas several champions can easily solo Dragon with just the Devourer enchantment. (some even before, but you don't get stacks from that)

Dragon is far too easy to kill, for the reward of 5 devourer stacks and its permanent 5-man buff. I also think skuttle should only give 1 stack, since it gives the ward anyway. The game for the jungler shouldn't become whoever gets the scuttles has more stacks or _need to focus scuttles because the opponent already got sated. _ (of course, this is only in cases where both junglers would buy Dev, and with Xin's buffs coming up this will actually pose a problem)

Harold, since he's nearly impossible to solo alone due to his "weak spot" being the side you can't attack solo, is right to give 5 stacks. Plus he's hard to kill before de-spawn even with your top laner helping. Baron should remain at 5 for obvious, similar reasons.

This would make Sated the Mid-game power spike it's meant to be, instead of the 15-minute spike it's become for champions who already have incredibly fast/easy clear time.

There's my long-winded explanation for why only Purple monsters should give 5 devourer stacks.

**Edit 2: ** Champion kills and assists should give 3 stacks, so that the jungler can't simply solo drag and pretend that was their way of ganking. Warwick Additionally, that would allow a devourer jungler who's behind to get stacks without leaving his team at all, vs. the current method of having to ignore them to focus scuttles while the enemy who's either already sated or doesn't need it does a jungler's actual job.

#TL/DR: Baron, Herald: 5 stacks Dragon: 2 stacks (Already gives a permanent team buff) Scuttle: 1 stack (gives a ward on objectives) Champion kills/assists: 3 stacks (so that a Devourer jungler who's behind on stacks doesn't have to neglect his team to get them)

Please note that this wouldn't make it any more difficult for the champs with extremely strong clear and sustain to do their jobs. It'd just give them more incentive to walk out of the jungle.

21 Comments

KillerKell2 votes

The #1 issue with Feral Flare is the #1 issue with Sated Devourer.

Which is, Jungle will ignore Lanes until completed. (I loved FF and like Sated, but I still gank... especially once they changed for Kills and Assists to give Stacks.)

So now, we want to take it LONGER for the Jungle to complete the item and get back to the game?

I don't see many getting behind it.

Sir Yamazuki1 votes

{quoted}

The #1 issue with Feral Flare is the #1 issue with Sated Devourer.

Which is, Jungle will ignore Lanes until completed. (I loved FF and like Sated, but I still gank... especially once they changed for Kills and Assists to give Stacks.)

So now, we want to take it LONGER for the Jungle to complete the item and get back to the game?

I don't see many getting behind it.

With or without FF/Devour people who played Udyr, Shyv, Yi, etc jungle weren't ganking even when they were buying Warrior or Cinderhulk until they farmed enough. The issue isn't the item, but the mentality that these champions "can't gank". It is the same for Warwick, devour or not people rarely ever do anything but farm pre 6 and then go back to doing nothing when ult is on cool down. A lot of people don't know how to gank, even when they're playing champions that can fairly well, and blaming it on an item is silly.

KillerKell1 votes

Actually it was a problem with the items, because it EXTENDED the Champions that Player would get an "Udyr Mentality" with, and it took those Udyr/Shyv/Yi's that WOULD Gank Early and took them to Hard Core Farm Mode.

Which is why Kills and Assists should ALWAYS be part of any Stacking System.

Then it's an opportunity cost... can I get as many stacks as quickly with this Gank as I could if I just kept Farming for that Duration. Which is why Kills/Assists need to have MORE incentive.

As for Warwick, he really is a Champion that by the Kit shouldn't be Ganking before he gets his Ult. But people take that to an extreme. Sometimes I don't need a Kill in the Lane, just the PRESENCE of Pressure can get them to back off sometimes. Sometimes just standing in a Brush you KNOW is Warded is enough to get them to back off.

Jungles not knowing how to gank is an issue, but no less than ADC not knowing how to kite or Tanks not Body Blocking and Peeling. That's just Player Inability.

FF (which I absolutely loved, by the way, ESPECIALLY once they added Stacks for KA) and Sated DID reward players for ignoring the lanes. To the point that I even found myself (and many others) would not get to finish a Camp because the Enemy Nexus was exploding. Sure, usually we left to Life Steal and come back, but the point is we'd Clear a Camp in a Situation where we obviously had the game Won and simply hitting the Nexus with the Team would have finished faster. I'm sure others were FAR worse in their transgressions, because I made it a point to not be AFK like that and would still fall into it from time to time. (Contrast that with a Sejuani where I would Cinderhulk, and I might finish with 36 CS because all I did Post-3 was Gank and Push Turret for an extreme example in the opposite direction.)

GlockHammer1 votes

I a sense I agree, the game is already far to snowbally and stale, since mistakes are so extremely punishing in the current meta. But on the other hand, it's a nice reward for junglers who stay ahead in their game.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

I'll edit the post to include my actual long-winded explanation. This isn't a joke post.

KillerKell2 votes

It's also about the only way a Devourer Jungle BEHIND can come back... focusing the Scuttles and Dragon while the Ahead Jungle is pressuring lanes, so that he can get Sated to match him.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Edited the post again. So adding more stacks to champion kills would not only make my idea more fair when behind, but would also force the jungler to gank and stick with allies--especially when behind-- instead of letting the enemy jungler punish the lanes.

KillerKell1 votes

Yes.

When behind it is easier to get Assists and Kills when Grouped, so looking for the right Gank or Team Fight would be worth more to a Devourer that is behind.

These tend to take more time to set up, and longer to execute, so the Ahead Jungle would simply catch out weaker foes and power farm until Sated.

Once Sated, the only reason to Power Farm is to reach the next Item for a Power Spike... which should be done AFTER giving your team an Advantage (because if you aren't using Being Ahead to give your Team an Advantage, you are wasting an Advantage). Wreck Lane, escort Team to Turret, go Farm for Gold for the next Item. Take Dragon with Team, farm Gold for next Item. So you are still part of objectives, but once they are reasonably secured it's back to Power Farm until you are needed again, so you STAY ahead.

Ryùuzaki1 votes

that's actually true and its one of the reasons games are ending really really fast now people start a surrender vote once the enemy yi makes it to 30stacks (which is really fast )

Rebonack1 votes

Devourer shouldn't give stacks at all. It makes OnHit itemization nearly impossible to balance for non-Junglers.

Just give it Bloodrazor's old %HP passive and then make a new Jungle enchant that builds out of Zeal and stacks AD on monster kills so Yi and Kindred won't feel neglected.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

What did Bloodrazor do? I didn't start playing until the week after Karma's rework.

Personally, I've always said that the "magic damage on hit" jungle item would be better giving Crit chance, because any champ who builds it (Prior to the advent of Sated making any and all junglers with anything auto related better with than without) is useful with crit chance.

Rebonack1 votes

{quoted}

What did Bloodrazor do? I didn't start playing until the week after Karma's rework.

Personally, I've always said that the "magic damage on hit" jungle item would be better giving Crit chance, because any champ who builds it (Prior to the advent of Sated making any and all junglers with anything auto related better with than without) is useful with crit chance.

An accurate assessment of the balance between OnHit and Crit. OnHit is a mid-game stat, but Devourer is warping its perceived power.

Bloodrazor did 4% of the target's max HP in magic damage. Most notably, it was uncapped against monsters. In effect, it was an item to help you control Dragon and Baron while also being decent against Champions.

It got removed because it was a trap item on ADCs.

Go figure.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Ah. Damn.

Titanium701 votes

So... IF someone runs a devourer Champ - what stops you from warding Dragon and collapsing on him when he intents to kill it? (Against a Devourer Champ you will most likely win a a 4v4 or 5v5 if TPs are ready. ^^)

This 'counter' strategy is the whole reason for those 5 stacks - a Devourer Champ can farm 24/7 in his Jgl, but this will take some time and put his team in disadavantage OR he risks the River Fight(Scuttle) or an Objective to get sated faster... it's about Gameplay and Decision Making!

Without those Multistacks they'd Buff Devourer in an other way.. something like less stacks to get sated. I prefer the current state.

And btw.. Herald can be done Solo quiet easy as well

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Your scenario assumes that the jungler who picked a Sated champ did so because he's a bad player, as opposed to doing so because it allows them to focus more on positioning than mechanical skill.

Any jungler worth his salt can play one of these champs and won't go or the solo when the enemies have the chance to take it from him with numbers. Remember that.

Then there's the case where his allies just killed you bot, so the enemy gets 2 kills and 5 devourer stacks.

Titanium701 votes

Or... you kill their Bot and take Drake for your selfe, to not worry about this problem for next minutes and killing another bird by setting their Jungler back with the same stone because devourer is balanced around getting those multistacks to some degree?

EDIT: Once again! As Jgl YOU should have less problems ganking a Bot than an unstacked squishy Devourer-Guy!

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Again, you're assuming your bot lane is in a position to allow for that. This isn't a single-player game, and my suggestion takes that into account.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

And you completely neglect the fact that AA champs weren't in a difficult spot before this, either. They could easily do their jobs without having their on-hit effects doubled and cooldowns cut. The item itself isn't balanced, but it doesn't look like they'll remove it.

Titanium701 votes

That's another POINT!

You hate devourer! Not the 5 stacks - you want those 5 stacks removed as a Nerf!

I just telling you those 5 stacks exist to make AFK-farming less profitable and encourage Gameplay!

The Ecdysiast1 votes

So you didn't read the whole post, as I explained a solution to that.

The Bearded Bard1 votes

Sated is way too strong for how easy it is to get.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by The Ecdysiast

Please Add Black Market Brawlers to the Rotation
Gameplay97 comments
273
votes
No chest for S- if a lobby member is punished
Report a Bug89 comments
212
votes
590 RP is not 6300 IP (Rune Page Cost inequality)
Gameplay100 comments
207
votes
Solari "rejected all other forms of light as false"
Story, Art, & Sound96 comments
160
votes
PSA that Soraka does %HP True damage
Gameplay96 comments
150
votes
They should keep this Yasuo "bug"
Gameplay201 comments
136
votes