Kit Comparisons: Old vs New
Here I'm going to look at two kits, one very old, and one fairly new, and look at the consequences these kits have on the gameplay (at least, how I see they impact gameplay).
The two kits I will be comparing are 
's and 
's. I will be comparing these 2 champions in particular because both have:
-
An extremely long snare, up to 3s each.
-
An AOE damage overtime effect that synergizes well with their long snares.
-
An AOE ultimate that channels and stuns.
-
A distinct mechanic that helps them land their ultimate abilities.
and it is these skills in particular that I will be examining.
TL:DR Neeko's kit, when compared to Morgana's kit, strips the game of meaningful interaction, and saddles both players with unenjoyable gameplay.
Snares
Morgana's Q is a line skill shot that stops upon hitting any valid target. As such, any minion in lane creates a cone behind it that an opposing champion can stand in to reduce the threat of being hit with the binding. This encourages an opponent to stand in the minion wave, positioned at the center of the lane, farthest from the lane brushes (top and bot) or the river bushes (mid): a very safe position in lane.
By doing so, a Morgana player has a choice: maneuver to a risky position on the edges of the lane to get an angle to hit the snare, which opens you up to ganks and hidden threats; or stay in the center of the lane and forfeit the ability to maximize harass. This mechanic creates a dialogue in which both players give and take in positioning and threat, opening up opportunity for meaningful interaction.
Neeko's E is a line skill shot that expands upon hitting any valid target, moving faster, becoming harder to avoid, and rooting for longer. As such, any minion in lane creates a cone behind it that an opposing champion wants to avoid standing.
This difference has many consequences, all of which I argue lead to less interesting gameplay.
-
A champion who stands behind their minions is at threat of the empowered root. If they do what they are encouraged to do, which is to stand away from the wave, they are forced towards the edges of the lane, in which they expose themselves to ganks and hidden threats. This is notably a greater problem than many seasons ago, since vision is sparse and it is not possible to maintain vision coverage for the duration that Neeko can threaten her root (which is essentially always).
-
Neeko does not need to maneuver about the fringes of the lane to look to hit her root in the same way that Morgana needs to. As a consequence, Neeko never has any reason to expose herself to threats by moving into more dangerous zones in the lane. Neeko can happily sit in the middle of the lane at all times, until time arises when she feels like roaming or warding.
-
While Morgana's binding cannot hit a champion behind minons, Neeko's barbs can root a champion, even if it has not yet hit another target. Thus, standing behind minions is a zone of safety against Morgana, while standing away from minions is merely a less-threatening zone.
In comparing the roots alone, we see that Morgana's Binding encourages a push and pull from two champions, in which Morgana must give something up to gain something: a classic risk-reward scenario. The farther up Morgana pushes, the fewer obstacles to block her root, and the more risks she becomes vulnerable to. By contrast, Neeko's root is a case of getting much from doing nothing. Neeko does not need to abandon the safest zones of the lane to threaten with her main set-up tool, nor is she any more compelled to make a play if her opponent positions to reduce the threats, since her root still hits outside of minion waves.
Damage Over Time
Morgana's puddle lands immediately: much too quickly to avoid being hit by. However, it is a damage over time effect that inflicts % missing HP. If Morgana misses her binding, then you will be at full health, and will be free to avoid most of the damage potential of the ability. If she hits her binding, then you will be chunked, and will not be able to leave the area of effect, and will eat much of the damage of the puddle.
Furthermore, as a persistent AOE DOT, the puddle's damage is back-loaded: the more you stand in the puddle, the more it hurts. Since the puddle lands instantly, this reduces frustration from playing against it (compare this to Soraka puddle, where the damage is front-loaded, and things like Aery make it poke reasonably hard: no counter-play beyond opportunity, and pure frustration).
Neeko's Blooming doesn't land immediately, but is extremely fast and has a fairly wide radius, making it exceptionally hard to dodge. Despite that, Neeko's Blooming is front-loaded: the first hit does more damage than the second and third. As a result, even if Neeko misses (or even doesn't use) her Tangle-Barbs, being hit by Blooming will result in eating 40% of the potential damage of the ability: that would be the equivalent of standing on Morgana's puddle for 2 seconds. And this is assuming that Neeko
In comparing these two abilities, we see that Morgana's puddle rewards her greatly for hitting her Binding, but forces her to seed offensive pressure if she misses her puddle. This creates a clear window in which she is strong, and in which she can be pushed around. By contrast, Neeko's Blooming retains enough of its damage potential to be meaningful, even if she misses her root. Neeko is greatly rewarded for hitting her binding, but is not punished in the same manner for missing it. Once more, this creates a situation in which she stands to gain something without risking very much.
Ultimate Abilities, and Mechanics to Hit Them
Morgana's ultimate, and her black shield, allow her to run in, tag all opposing champions in a radius, slow them, and after channeling, stun all those who have not yet broken the shackles. There are several wonderful parts about this design.
-
It is very clear what is happening when she channels her ultimate.
-
Since the stun is based on a tether, escaping the radius allows a target to avoid the ability. Essentially, you can flash out of this ability, and be confident you are safe. If Morgana wants to follow the flash, she must flash before her target does.
Neeko's ultimate, and her disguise, throw all of these interactions to the wayside in favour of "innovation". She pretends to be another champion, channels invisibly to her opponent, before stunning and heavily damaging them. Neeko also gains a shield in the process. The most critical differences:
-
It is not fun being hit by an ability as impactful as an ultimate when there is no hit indicator. Yes, brushes are a thing, but seriously, do you enjoy being hit by invisible Nunu ultimates? Imagine if Morgana's ultimate had precisely the same behavior, except that it did not have any audio effects or visual markers. It would be frustrating beyond belief.
-
Since the stun is based on radius at moment of impact, escaping the radius of the channel does not necessarily mean a target has avoided the ability. If Neeko wants to follow the flash, she can flash after confirming her target has already burned the resource.
Whilst in the previous comparisons, I have pushed that Neeko's kit reduces interaction, I'm also going to argue that Neeko's ultimate-aiding mechanic (no indicator when disguised) is a mechanic that is not fun to play against, nor is it particularly fun to use. It simply seems like change for the sake of innovation, rather than for the sake of enjoyment.
If Morgana wishes to ensure her ultimate lands on a mobile target, she must either hit her snare or commit her resources before her opponent has commited theirs. Making a play on Morgana would, in that case, demand the play-maker commit their resources first.
If Neeko wants to ensure her ultimate lands on a mobile target, she can walk up disguised and hit them without them realizing what's happening, or she can commit her resources after her opponent has.
Once again, in this situation, Neeko does not need to risk anything to gain something in return.
Neeko's new kit is, in many ways, very similar to Morgana's, but it seems as though the changes where not made with the goal of creating interactions that are engaging to players. Giving any player a reward grossly disproportionate to the risk devalues that player's sense of worth. They are put in such a position of power without doing anything or risking anything. Winning then doesn't feel like they made the correct decision or the right play: they simply had sharper tools.
This is even worse when this disproportionality is at the expense of the adversary, who must then make greater risks to achieve worse rewards. It becomes un-fun to play because they're simply going to lose more often for making the correct call (that's statistically what it means to take high risks with low rewards).
