So this balance philosophy of nerf the strong instead of buff the weak

IsIsGankedParis·Dec 1, 2014·4 votes·782 views

Isn't gonna work out so well, we got numerous champs who were strong because of the meta nerfed(see Twitch), we got champions nerfed because most others of their class got nerfed(Talon), and we got a whole class nerfed along with select champs(Renekton and Bruisers).

Can you explain to me how this will work in the long run? I mean you're going to repeat yourself in this cycle, somewhere along like a year or so Twitch might become FOTM again or Talon will be strong again then they get nerfed again, how is just nerfing them going to help this game?

Why can't we buff the weak to be competing with the strong?

30 Comments

DaCushDec 1, 20144 votes

Well nerfing more than buffing is a safer route since you won't have a power creep so it makes sense but there are some champions that are too under-powered that they do need a buff I agree.

Sightless66Dec 2, 20141 votes

nerfing more than buffing is a safer route since you won't have a power creep

Power creep isn't necessarily a problem when the power levels of all other things can be retroactively adjusted to meet the new standard. It was more a problem with card games where new cards could overpower old ones entirely and make them obsolete.

A bigger problem right now is how limiting champion power limits the number of potential champion mechanics because certain mechanics simply don't work because the baseline power they would require is just too high. This is part of the reason why Dota has more potential for unique mechanics than League does.

Power creep is not a realistic risk in this game. We should be concerned about creep related to specific mechanics, such as mobility or CC, not just power.

HayaishiDec 3, 20141 votes

Well nerfing more than buffing is a safer route since you won't have a power creep so it makes sense but there are some champions that are too under-powered that they do need a buff I agree.

And we will still have power creep due to new releases.

Fed by Snu SnuDec 1, 20142 votes

They were supposed to have learned better by now and started buffing.

I guess old habits aren't easy to drop.

DaCushDec 1, 20141 votes

It's a good habit to nerf more than buff. Like I said before, it's a lot safer to go the nerf route than the buff route because of power creep. Dota champions are an example. Although there are champions that have outdated kits because they are old and need to be brought up to standards but I feel the reason Riot hasn't done this is because they are probably accompanied with a complete VU(Sion) which requires a lot of work and time.

Fed by Snu SnuDec 2, 20141 votes

And then you realize that dota is more balanced that LoL, so you can't bring that up as a negative example. There is no power creeping in dota. Meanwhile, LoL will eventually have to nerf creeps. AGAIN. Because it has actually happened in the past.

DaCushDec 2, 20141 votes

I wasn't bringing it up as a negative example. I was bringing it up to explain how it could make LoL if they were to resort to buffing champions more than nerfing them. Dota "is" power creep but it's balanced around power creep. I wasn't saying that it was a bad thing but it's a MUCH different play style.

Fed by Snu SnuDec 2, 20141 votes

I don't think you understand what the term "power creep" means.

Rock RockburghDec 2, 20141 votes

I'm not sure he does either. Dota is balanced around a higher level of utility. It doesn't have the mobility issues of League, since anyone can buy a Force/Blink/BoT and go to town. Some heroes are better at it, sure (Tinker with BoTs-- TP to lane, Rearm, TP to fountain, repeat.) but anyone CAN do it.

Spells tend to be strongest early-game because they only scale with level. AD heroes scale into the lategame because that's what all the items are for-- and because lategame, people will have BKB/Linken's. (Magic immunity for X seconds / Banshee's.)

It's also a more item-centric game. As a support, you go into it thinking "Okay, I need a Eul's Scepter to protect our ulting Death Prophet and/or chase down their carry." As a carry, you think "I should build a Butterfly first for damage, but if I start falling behind I need to rush Assault Cuirass instead," because having either of those items will have a huge impact on your playstyle. Butterfly makes you tankier (evasion), more dangerous (AD and AS), and faster (active MS). AC has an AS aura on it, plus a huge amount of armor.

Because of that, almost any hero is viable-- you just need to figure out what items they like, instead of looking for the few champs that are currently/reliably being buffed and sticking to them.

SmokingPuffinDec 2, 20142 votes

It's not actually true, though. Go back through the patch notes and you'll see tons of weak champions getting buffed.

We just remember the nerfs more because OP champs have more visibility than UP champs.

Leti the YetiDec 1, 20141 votes

somewhere in the near future

.1 health regen scalings on Caitlyn??? holy balls thats OP

Nausicäa Dec 1, 20141 votes

Are you new? They have been doing this forever.

KingsgraveDec 2, 20141 votes

They do both though?

EffectFXDec 2, 20141 votes

Twitch is still a strong champion, talon needed his silence removed. Deal with it.

Plenty of champions get buffed, don't be stupid.

Sightless66Dec 2, 20141 votes

Plenty of champions get buffed, don't be stupid

Riot nerfs more often than they buff, and nerfs tend to be larger than buffs are as well. It's not exactly unreasonable to say that Riot has a mainly nerf-centered balance philosophy.

EffectFXDec 2, 20141 votes

I disagree.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

You can disagree if you want. Doesn't mean much. Numerically, they nerf more than they buff, and nerfs are more likely to remove mechanics or lower numbers by a large amount than buffs are to add mechanics or increase numbers by a large amount. Count if you want.

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

Pure speculation on your part.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

Prove me wrong then. Prove that all the complaints about this in the past about this wrong.

Come on dude. Morello has said multiple times that he considers nerfing to be a superior balance option to buffing. Xypherous has said much the same. What do you base your belief on?

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

I have a better idea, you prove me wrong.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

Main reasons: I'm on the side that everyone else agrees with. I'm on the side that Morello has said he's on. The only Rioter who said otherwise was CertainlyT 9 months ago, and in the thread he posted in, he met with major community resistance. You're the one in defiance, you prove your point. Not worth it to me to convince the only guy with that opinion. More worth it for you to use as evidence to convince virtually everyone else.

Do it or don't. Facts remain either way.

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

You aren't presenting facts, merely speculation.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

Technically not speculation because I'm claiming I know that something is a fact, not guessing at what the facts could be. It's a claim I haven't justified to you, but it's still a claim. I'm just saying that I know what the facts are, and since you're the only one I've seen who has this opinion, it's not worth the time to prove it to you. Since you also aren't willing to calculate it, there's nothing more to say.

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

It technically is.

"the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence"

You're making a claim with no firm evidence.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

I'm telling you I have firm evidence in the form of math proving my claim, and I'm not willing to recalculate it to present it to you. If there is a claim that concrete evidence exists and has been witnessed, it ceases to be speculation. It then becomes a matter of veracity: do you think I am lying to you or not. (I think I know the answer to that). If I am, then I'm not making theories or conjectures because I'm creating false evidence. Speculation is a matter of incomplete information, not deliberately misrepresentations of the presence of information.

Just as an aside, relating to your first post, saying "don't be stupid" when making a claim is kind of silly if you can't back up your claim.

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

You don't.

You're speculating because you don't have the information you claim to have.

My initial post is correct regardless of whether or not riot nerfs more then they nerf.

Sightless66Dec 3, 20141 votes

Your initial post just says "plenty of champions get buffed". I do have to acknowledge that this is technically correct, although completely irrelevant to any conversation in this thread. No one is claiming that champions aren't ever buffed.

I assumed that you were trying to make a claim relevant to the topic at hand. My bad. Shouldn't assume anything.

EffectFXDec 3, 20141 votes

It is a relevant "claim". Plenty of champions do get buffed. It's not an endless cycle of nerfs. Never mind the changes to the game that aren't binary in terms of buffs or nerfs.

NinpireDec 3, 20141 votes

Because if you buff all the weak they would all be strong and then everyone who builds damage is going to get deleted

QuephaDec 3, 20141 votes

because one strong champion that eclipses other champions in the game becomes more popular and thus becomes a bigger problem for players who want to play the game, so to help the players enjoy the game that champion needs to be brought in line with other champions. to do this you can either nerf the offending champion to bring him back into the pack or buff the alternatives. league has over 100 champions what's easier to accomplish, 1 nerf or 120 buffs?