"This game is stale, the meta never changes!" -community

Raptamei·Jan 3, 2015·34 votes·3,866 views

Top lane changes completely and is now a ranged lane.

"Riot fix top lane, ranged champions are not supposed to be able to go top, nerf them" -community

60 Comments

SmokinSickStyleJan 3, 201524 votes

I must assume this community guy is one person that changes opinions based on his mood?

When someone is ok with the current game 90% of the time he\she's not going to make threads about it.

When someone is not ok with the current state he\she's gonna obviously gonna make threads about it.

LoL comminuty is made of people that have different tastes and opinions about the game, that's why apparently the community doesn't seem to be happy, because if something changes, those who wanted the changes will STFU and those who didn't will surely brag on the forums, it's a cycle.

That's it.

SecretAgentHulkJan 3, 20158 votes

You are correct in diagnosing why this is. OP is correct that "the community" is a stupid thing to look to for any kind of coherent thought on anything.

Riot should be listening to the community and using their input to inform decisions regarding balance, design, etc., but they should not be solely or even mostly using community input as their only guiding light. I have a large suspicion that the reason Lee Sin is not nerfed much is because contrary to what "the community" constantly bitches about, Riot's gameplay data shows him to be in a decent spot right now.

killd0zerJan 3, 20155 votes

I think it was Xypherous who excellently said: "People are great at finding what they do or don't like, but poor at finding out exactly what it is or how to fix it" or something along the line of that.

Listening to "Hey we don't like top being only melee" is fine. Listening to "Add turn rates and gut every ranged champion" isn't

RaptameiJan 4, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I think it was Xypherous who excellently said: "People are great at finding what they do or don't like, but poor at finding out exactly what it is or how to fix it" or something along the line of that.

If Xypherous said this, perhaps I told Xypherous. :p I knew that guy once and used to wield the above statement a billion times back in the day in the context of a game mod I was managing. The original statement was "when users have a problem, they are usually right, when users have a solution, they are usually wrong."

The logical (albeit somewhat defeatist) consequence of that statement is that when people complain, you should do something about it even if you know for a fact that they are wrong. When people QQ that Leblanc is OP even though she has a

MEMEME670Jan 4, 20151 votes

when people complain, you should do something about it even if you know for a fact that they are wrong.

This compromises the legitimacy of a competitive meta.

WheatloafJan 4, 20151 votes

Doing something about it can include figuring out a way to get people to understand why they might be wrong.

MEMEME670Jan 5, 20151 votes

Given that he said it was a defeatist consequence, I doubt he meant that.

killd0zerJan 4, 20151 votes

You know, I actually think that's the quote.

I assume you meant to finish that sentence with something like "People think she's op, even though she has a low win rate" and I agree perfectly.

People can easily tell if they enjoy or do not enjoy playing with or against a LeBlanc. If they don't like LeBlanc, they might think she's op, when in reality her design is frustrating.

AHeroNamedHawkeJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

You know, I actually think that's the quote.

I assume you meant to finish that sentence with something like "People think she's op, even though she has a low win rate" and I agree perfectly.

People can easily tell if they enjoy or do not enjoy playing with or against a LeBlanc. If they don't like LeBlanc, they might think she's op, when in reality her design is frustrating.

And Zed is overpowered, even with a low win rate

Win rates are not a black and white balance metric for how good something is

killd0zerJan 4, 20151 votes

It's almost like you didn't even read the post you quoted.

Hyrum GraffJan 3, 20153 votes

{quoted}

You are correct in diagnosing why this is. OP is correct that "the community" is a stupid thing to look to for any kind of coherent thought on anything.

Riot should be listening to the community and using their input to inform decisions regarding balance, design, etc., but they should not be solely or even mostly using community input as their only guiding light. I have a large suspicion that the reason Lee Sin is not nerfed much is because contrary to what "the community" constantly bitches about, Riot's gameplay data shows him to be in a decent spot right now.

Agreed on the balance thing. But I think that playing against a good Lee, like playing against a good Zed, or a good Fizz or... (you see where I'm going) just doesn't feel like you can do much. When you win a fight, you feel like you won because he misplayed, not because you outplayed.

Aurelius MaximusJan 3, 20153 votes

when you get to very high level play of nearly any game the game is decided by mistakes, not by "outplaying".

when you get very good, things become correct plays, incorrect, or debatable.

Hyrum GraffJan 3, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Owl Or Nothing,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=btwYiekr,comment-id=0000000000020000,timestamp=2015-01-03T20:13:51.294+0000)

when you get to very high level play of nearly any game the game is decided by mistakes, not by "outplaying".

when you get very good, things become correct plays, incorrect, or debatable.

Fair point that I hadn't thought about before. Although I still feel like in combat vs one of these champs, I can play perfectly and my opponent can still outplay me, where I can only capitalize on their mistakes.

Kuroi86Jan 3, 20153 votes

Not to be harsh, I apply this to myself. If you think perfectly and they outplay you, then you didn't play perfectly.

Aurelius MaximusJan 4, 20151 votes

if both people play perfectly it comes down to picks

However im betting that you never play perfectly, or almost never do, given that even pro players make tons of mistakes every game

RaptameiJan 4, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Owl Or Nothing,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=btwYiekr,comment-id=000000000002000000000001,timestamp=2015-01-04T01:59:11.209+0000)

if both people play perfectly it comes down to picks

If both people play perfectly, they would pick the best champions anyway. Champion select is part of the game and picking the best champions is part of player skill.

Intentionally picking shit champs is the equivalent of hosting "no rush" Starcraft games because you want to mass battlecruisers and crying when the enemy does indeed rush you.

Hyrum GraffJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Intentionally picking shit champs is the equivalent of hosting "no rush" Starcraft games because you want to mass battlecruisers and crying when the enemy does indeed rush you.

Curse your zerglings!

On a more serious note, I agree with you, but wish it weren't that way -- I wish all champs were on equal footing, from an objective, power-level standpoint. Anivia and Diana is so fun to play, but I just can't justify picking them in ranked, except in VERY niche situations (eg, diana into ahri mid).

So, on that footing, I guess the reason I'm complaining about Zed is that I feel he's objectively stronger than many other champions.

That's OK because his power takes a lot of skill to utilize fully. However, it doesn't take much skill for him to be exceptionally safe, which is frustrating. Much like Fizz, Lee, Ziggs, etc.

MEMEME670Jan 4, 20152 votes

So, on that footing, I guess the reason I'm complaining about Zed is that I feel he's objectively stronger than many other champions.

That's OK because his power takes a lot of skill to utilize fully. However, it doesn't take much skill for him to be exceptionally safe, which is frustrating. Much like Fizz, Lee, Ziggs, etc.

This isn't how game balance works. Harder to play champions are not allowed to be objectively better than other champions, or else once someone masters them they must be nerfed regardless.

Hyrum GraffJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

This isn't how game balance works. Harder to play champions are not allowed to be objectively better than other champions, or else once someone masters them they must be nerfed regardless.

I don't have a problem with hard champions having a lot of power. I do have a problem with those same champions being exceptionally safe, without taking much skill to access that safety.

MEMEME670Jan 5, 20151 votes

Hard champs having more power than easier champs simply doesn't work if you want the game to be balanced, regardless of how safe they are.

That's what I'm saying.

RaptameiJan 4, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Owl Or Nothing,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=btwYiekr,comment-id=0000000000020000,timestamp=2015-01-03T20:13:51.294+0000)

when you get to very high level play of nearly any game the game is decided by mistakes, not by "outplaying".

when you get very good, things become correct plays, incorrect, or debatable.

Then the game doesn't have a sufficiently high skill cap.

There is no such thing as a correct game of Dota. Or a correctly played soccer game, boxing match, etc.

Aurelius MaximusJan 4, 20151 votes

mechanically, yes there is. especially for boxing and soccer. there's also perfect chess matches are you telling me chess is low skill cap?

Old Man TeetoJan 3, 20157 votes

I've disliked the direction the meta went at the start of season 3.

Went from a control, team oriented, control game.

To a bursty, solo'ist, assassin game.

Game has the least amount of team work needed ever, least reason to buy defensive items, and shortest fights yet.

ChessburgerJan 4, 20151 votes

That is exactly how I feel. I loved the small nuances of high lvl play pre s3, now it's all flashy plays bursting all over the place and I suspect it's partly because Riot is balancing for it. LCS would be boring to watch for most of the LoL community who are silver or lower because they can't see or appreciate the small nuances in skill, they need to see flashy kills to keep them entertained. And in turn riot gets more publicity/money by doing what they're doing balance-wise and new champions kit-wise

SookoJan 3, 20156 votes

Maybe top wasn't the part of the meta that needed to change? Top is the more variable lane in the game (Mages, assassins, marksmen, tanks and fighters, even supports go there). I can only suspect that if a melee could be brought bot to render an ADC worthless it would create a lot of complaints.

AlljoyJan 3, 20153 votes

The community sounds alot like my ex, it has no idea what it wants, yet seems to be full of demands.

Demonsolder21Jan 4, 20151 votes

lol

Too TonJan 3, 20152 votes

I like change BUTTTTTTTTTT top laners (old tanks) have no place to go. If there is a meta change it better still have all the available classes still... that's like saying, "we don't need support anymore cause they suck late game...... lets add in cc tanks instead even better than the current support tanks!!!!!!!!!

Kowe The EwokJan 3, 20152 votes

I'ld rather say it's a mixed lane.

Irelia, Rek Sai, Riven, Jax, Rengar, Lee Sin, Pantheon, Rumble, Sion, Udyr, Singed, Maokai, Malphite, Akali, Wukong, Poppy (given, only maknoon does)... there are so many strong meele champions which are currently played toplane succesfully.

That's not even counting picks like Xin Zhao, Yasuo, Jarvan, Warwick, (Fizz) which are currently superior played on another postion but do well at top, too.

Or champions which are currently in a different state on PBE (Renekton)

Space BumJan 3, 20152 votes

Every champion has a counter pick. If you are first pick for a lane you should pick what you know and probably something you could feel safe farming under the tower with. There is no meta when it comes to second picks, as long as you are proficient with the most pain in the ass counter to a champ you are matched against you should defiantly pick it, even if you never see it in that lane.

YOU BEEN WARNEDJan 3, 20152 votes

Who said the game was stale to begin with? Every new champion brings an OP kit that starts it's own meta.

You remember the Ryze top era ? Every toplaner who wasn't playing Ryze hated it, how is this supposed to be the change the community seeks ????

If you're going to whine about something, follow with the history log.

DurzakaJan 3, 20152 votes

The meta isnt melee go top, range go mid, and adc/support go bot, with one jungle.

It is that ANY one champion goes top, ANY one champion goes mid, and ADC/Any champion goes with, with one jungle.

the staleness comes from the 1/1/2/1 lanes we have had for 4 1/2 years now.

Champion SkinJan 4, 20151 votes

Well you don't have to take an ADC if it is normal or something as it does actually work with kill lanes though you have to stomp pretty hard and preferably end the game before the enemy ADC catches up if you don't you might be in a pretty bad spot

James NicholasJan 4, 20152 votes

"Riot, why won't you talk to me!"

Community

TheKingDodoJan 4, 20152 votes

LeeSin Ranged Melee Tanky DPS Assassin Mage Tank Support Jungler, he works in any meta any lane any time babyyyyyyyy

KalarepaJan 3, 20151 votes

The core of the meta is ranged AD carry + 0 CS support bot lane. And it NEVER changes.

RaptameiJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

The core of the meta is ranged AD carry + 0 CS support bot lane. And it NEVER changes.

It already changed before. The ADC went mid originally.

And it is inevitable that when there's a duo lane, you put a 0CS champion in that duo lane, because more expensive items are more cost effective (unlike in Dota) so giving all the farm to one person is always the best option. And because a duo lane gets less experience, you inevitably want someone who scales with items instead of levels + someone who doesn't need either.

This is not a "rigid meta", this is common sense, just like the meta isn't enforcing a playstyle where you try to take the enemy nexus.

DurzakaJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

It already changed before. The ADC went mid originally.

And it is inevitable that when there's a duo lane, you put a 0CS champion in that duo lane, because more expensive items are more cost effective (unlike in Dota) so giving all the farm to one person is always the best option. And because a duo lane gets less experience, you inevitably want someone who scales with items instead of levels + someone who doesn't need either.

This is not a "rigid meta", this is common sense, just like the meta isn't enforcing a playstyle where you try to take the enemy nexus.

Yes, ADCs went mid.

For about half of season 1, before people truly understood how the game worked.

That doesnt count.

SexyTaylorSwiftJan 4, 20151 votes

You must not be a relic shield kind of man.

RWCJJan 3, 20151 votes

I love going against ranged champs in top lane, they are so squishy, Jax can reck them. Use your q,w, then your E to either do more damage or back off after your Q and W so you don't take any damage.

Sir FuzziJan 4, 20151 votes

the reason we call it stale is because any rift game is the same: a dude top, a jungle with the ability to remove one or more persons from a fight, the mid, and the duo bot.

This basically does not change. There is a grounds there upon which to assume it might be stale.

As for opinions you hear, well, if someone enjoys the game they'll play it.

DigitalityJan 4, 20151 votes

I loathe the phrase "the meta". Most of the people who use it are clueless about metagaming. Adhering to rigid dogma without thought or question is literally the opposite of what meta gaming is about. If you have no idea why you're doing the things you do, outside of copying someone else in an attempt at being optimal, you have NO meta. Most of the people I see being called meta breakers are the ones that actually have some sort of thought or reason for trying the things they do.

The metagame is more than who goes where anyway. There's a lot of factors that contribute to it. Optimum play changes with almost every major patch, and drastically changes with every new season. So even when the positional metagame is enforced, anyone that says "the metagame is stale" simply has no sense for depth of play.

RaptameiJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I loathe the phrase "the meta". Most of the people who use it are clueless about metagaming. Adhering to rigid dogma without thought or question is literally the opposite of what meta gaming is about.

Yes, but some low tier nooblord is better off netdecking than relying on his own limited knowledge. Other people who are better at the game than him have already figured out how to play if you want to win, so why reinvent the wheel?

DigitalityJan 4, 20151 votes

I both agree and disagree. It's one thing when the mechanics essentially play themselves or are inherently simple and powerful. When you have to consistently execute it well to see results though it turns out to not always be true. Even in simpler settings they're more vulnerable to being countered out if they don't know why their choices are supposed to function a certain way and how to enforce that strength and shift gears to deal with outliers.

Season 2 ADCs were a perfect example. Low-tier play was dominated by bruisers and threads were filled with QQ about OP bruisers while the game we saw played at a high level was a completely different story. A true metagamer (who's goal is victory) would play to his opponents skill if the situation allows for it and would be more optimal. Path of least resistance. A full bruiser comp could have rolled you out of bronze and silver with ease at those levels of play with much less effort.

The reason was simple, bruisers had a higher mistake threshold for their lower output potential. Given high error prone players using higher risk but potentially stronger choices, the strength of the bruiser class was enhanced. They had more windows of opportunity to capitalize on than if the game was played at a higher skill level.

Now this presents an issue wherein you're not practicing certain core mechanics in favor of using a gimmick, but I don't think the competitive setting is the place to really be working on your mechanical skill in the first place. You go into that setting to win and you should use and abuse all manner of game knowledge and skill that you have to do so. I also don't think you're necessarily developing good habits in general at that level against weaker players so it could be somewhat dismissed as a concern.

There are a lot of "non-meta" gimmicks in league that can be abused to crush pseudo-meta players because they don't optimize the strength of their choices.

AHeroNamedHawkeJan 4, 20151 votes

"Omg nerf assassins mages are for mid lane!" "Omg nerf tank supports I cant play Janna!" "Omg nerf assassin junglers I cant play tanks!" "Omg nerf Triforce carries so I can play Trist!"

It's the same for every role, and has been for some time

Rotating champions out of viability is a bandaid solution that doesnt actually address any problems

JustMyBassCannonJan 4, 20151 votes

Most of those, I can understand, but...

[{quoted}](name=Charles Barklius,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=btwYiekr,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2015-01-04T02:09:15.592+0000)

"Omg nerf assassin junglers I cant play tanks!"

...assassins don't usually beat tanks. Tank is the one role that's normally unafraid of assassins.

AHeroNamedHawkeJan 4, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Most of those, I can understand, but...

...assassins don't usually beat tanks. Tank is the one role that's normally unafraid of assassins.

You missed the point

and for a fairly long time tank junglers were completely outclassed by assassins, who could farm the jungle faster and duel far better, only catching up much later in the game when they finally got items

DWT12345Jan 4, 20151 votes

i see ranged top lane maybe 20% of games. The big meta changes happened in mid lane, where champions like Anivia Annie are no longer viable thanks to assassins like Zed Talon and such. Jungle of course just recieved a giant change.