Melee champions do more damage, especially at levels 3 and 5 and that helps to compensate for their lack of range but this design philosophy isn't reflected in items. Let's make dorans items provide double stats to melee to help balance melee vs range
Akenero1 votesAh, yes, let's just make it so that nasus can have 16% lifesteal at level 1
Deliberate Inter1 votesHe wouldn't build doran's blade level 1, he would build doran's ring and sell it later as he transitions into tank ib or tank tf
Akenero1 votesWhy wouldn't he buy d blade? All that sustain
And I brought up an extreme example of how some champions get extra stuff, specifically, sustain, because they're melee.
Deliberate Inter1 votesbecause E max nasus would be a thing and you'd buy dblade on your first back with cull and with phage or sheen if things went well or tabi v yasuo
Verxint1 votesWhy would E max nasus be a thing (its really not except in certain awful matchups, you want that Q CD for faster stacks) when he can either go 
for insane passive sustain or 
for 16% lifesteal and extra AD for easier stacks.
Deliberate Inter1 votesActually it used to be meta when the rune and mastery system first got changed, nasus was played as a lane bully and with these changes that would be the best route.
Verxint1 votesWhy the hell should Nasus be a lane bully? It stopped being meta because Riot changed things so that he can't be a lane bully because it goes completely against his gameplay identity.
Deliberate Inter1 votesTop lane is a 2v2, not a 1v1. There is counterplay and there are tradeoffs. Even if we gave Nasus this change AND threw on a 1 second stun at the end of His W he would not be meta in pro play or in the highest brackets of solo queue on good servers, the places league should be balanced around. You don't want to see a subpar pick become slightly less subpar?
Verxint1 votesYou actually think Wither should stun for 1 seconds at the end of its duration? Please be trolling.
Deliberate Inter1 votesNo but that's the point, even if you changed Dblade items AND added an extra buff on top of it, something VERY significant, many champions , nasus included, would still be subpar and not worthy of pick or ban in the level of play where matchups matter.
Verxint1 votesAnd other champions like 
would suddenly be completely absurd and push anyone else out of toplane, including anyone with ranged, because of how much they gain from those stats.
Just because Nasus wouldn't be OP with this change doesn't make it a smart idea.
Deliberate Inter1 votesDarius and renekton would still be counter picks, kled and riven would both still be bad in comp, Riven would be okay in solo queue but only for certain people at the high end of challenger, urgot sitll would have mana problems and Sion would be unmovable but there would stil be champs to be picked into him, Jax would not be first pickable.
Verxint1 votesThat's not the point. The point is that buffing items that all champions would use is a stupid idea because it would make the ones that are already the best even better, as well as ruin any hope what ranged champions exist in top lane have of ever participating, and claiming that this is okay just because Nasus wouldn't be overpowered (he would be pretty strong with this), is a completely stupid argument.
You're basically saying that because the champion isn't completely unconquerable that it wouldn't be a stupid change. And your entire argument is based on the idea that melees are struggling to fight ranged champs, which they're not. Every one of those champs will usually force a ranged champ to flash instantly if they get a good catch, and they either have built in sustain, their own ranged poke, or strong gap closers to all-in.
Deliberate Inter1 votesNo, it's not a stupid idea and you really don't have a point. The champions who would benefit from these changes in itemization are not alone, ALL melee champions would have the option of buying these items and very few matchups would outright turn on their head because of these changes either. And it's not like there is no counter play to a measure of sustain, ranged poke or gap closers. What you're saying suggests you don't understand any of the listed champs or any of their major matchups yet, and that's okay.
Verxint1 votesThere is counter play on both ends. Both sides can come out on top based on skill. My point is that it's already in a reasonable place, and there's absolutely no need to literally double the stats that Doran items give melee champs.
Furthermore, not every champ gets equal benefit from stat changes. The top laners that are already the best picks would gain more than the weaker ones. Jax's kit stands to gain a lot more from extra AD and lifesteal than most others. Renekton and Riven both get a lot from extra AD because of how their kits function. One of Sion's main weaknesses is his low base HP, so the extra 80 is a much larger effective increase to his durability than it is for other champs. The idea that sweeping changes to items will affect everyone who uses those items equally has never been the case.
Deliberate Inter1 votesACTUALLY, champions objectively have fixed values. The counter play in question is only an in practice thing. Played to the ideal, ranged champions just win, and in practice, skill and proposed itemization in question, ranged still have an advantage.
Also, none of that changes the fact that riven and jax especially have glaring problems and reasons to pick other champs (especially mages) over them in the top lane especially :)
Verxint1 votesThere are countless examples in this games history of itemization changes having unequal effects on champions. It is objectively wrong to say that buffing an item will give everyone who might use it the same power increase. Champions all have different interactions with stats.
WAZZZUP5001 votesNo sir. I don't think you realize how powerful those increases could be in the early game. Also, this would make those items way too cost efficient on melee.
Deliberate Inter1 votesDblade stats are additive, not multiplicative. And items like cull would still be more cost efficient
WAZZZUP5001 votes???? When did i say the stats would multiply? I know it would just add; it's still too strong for that stage in the game.
Deliberate Inter1 votesYou didn't say the stats would multiply, I was just politely insinuating that you are totally and objectively wrong that the items are too cost efficient on melee because it is only a faster and more front loaded power curve rather than REAL cost efficiency on multiplicative stats but since you couldn't take the hint...
WAZZZUP5001 votesDude just say what you mean next time. Also, you can't just slap an item on melee champs and say that it'll work for all equally. What about corrupting pot starts? What about champs that like to start longsword or dark seal? What about champs that have insane lvl 1 and 2s and would be able to abuse these extra stats?
Verxint1 votesDouble stats? Are you mad? I'm always talking about giving melee a bit more love in early laning but that's just absurd
160 HP, 12 HP/5, 10 bonus damage to minions, up to 40 HP over 10 seconds
120 HP, 30 AP, 10 MP/5, 10 bonus damage to minions
16 AD, 160 HP, 6% life steal.
Do you honestly think this would be even remotely fair?
Deliberate Inter1 votesI think ranged champions would still be better but these stat weights would help to give the melee an advantage to try to capitalize on and convert. The melee champions would be more likely to survive lane and have a better punish game if the ranged were bad ;)
Verxint2 votesNo these changes would make melee champs completely destroy ranged champs in lane, you're really underestimating the value of these raw stats in the first few levels. Melee champs can already punish bad ranged play pretty hard with a few exceptions of champs that are supposed to be crushed by kiting.
Deliberate Inter1 votesNot if the ranged champions have good input buffering, position well and use their resources as well. You can't just assume the melee champion plays scripter perfect after opting into some coin flippy engagement or pressure and the ranged character is just a bonobo, that isn't fair and you skew the results.
Verxint2 votesYou can't just assume the ranged champion is a perfect scripter while the melee champion charges in mindlessly like some chimpanzee, that isn't fair and you skew the results.
Deliberate Inter1 votesThe difference is that I don't need to. To say that melee champions with proposed ditems would just wreck ranged is an outrageous claim , it is still expected for ranged to have superior lanes against melee. The burden of proof is on you because you are trying to make an argument. And not just any argument, an argument against what is tried and tested.
Verxint1 votesAccording to lolalytics tier list, which is based on an algorithm that processes a variety of performance metrics, the highest tiers of top lane are
S+ 
S 
S- 
Of those 17 champions, there are 4 ranged ones (3 if you don't count Jayce).
Obviously melee champions have no trouble dealing with ranged champions if so many of them are considered in the highest tiers. If all of those melee champions received a massive buff in the form of enhanced Doran items, those ranged champions would likely be removed from the tiers entirely, with the possible exception of Vayne who might stay in S- tier. Vladimir and Quinn would probably be screwed, especially Vlad as he basically has to get well within threat range of literally everyone on this list in order to fight.
Every single one of the high tier melee champions have tools in their kit to handle ranged champions rather well
All of the dashes, shields, stunlock combos, execute.
Long range targetted leap, reliable stun, the ability to trade in both bursts and extended fights
Effectively absurd base HP, two dashes and a tether pull on a low CD
Self-Explanatory
His leap range is longer than most ranged champions autoattacks, his existence zones squishes.
Strong sustain, ranged slow that makes his ghouls aggro, and a cage. Shovel will chunk most squishy ranged champs like crazy if he gets near them.
Assassins designed to close onto ranged champs and explode them
Pretty much designed from the ground up to be able to pin down heavy kiters. Two speed boosts, a long range dash, a stun, and the ultimate.
Ranged stun, very spammable dash, damage reduction channel, and her ultimate
Probably the most countered by range here, but he punishes one single mistake so damn hard it doesn't really matter. Once he get you, he got you.
Roars, great HP regen, and a Q that can still hit most range champs when they try to attack
Two dashes, insane burst combo, awesome sustain
Is it possible for ranged champions to outplay some of these tools? Yes. Is it possible for these melee champions to use these tools to outplay ranged? Yes. As it already stands, it's clear that these tools are enough to give them quite a reasonable chance at fighting ranged, or else ranged champions would be much more prevalent in these statistics. If melee champions needed such absurd buffs as the Dorans items you suggest, you would not be seeing these champions with these kind of performance statistics. You would be seeing 
in this list at the very least. Some of those show up in A tier, but along with them is 
. To say that melee as it stands cannot punish ranged reasonably is ignoring statistics from the game, as well as what happens in high level play and pro play.
You can't make the argument that if the ranged champion plays better they'll beat the melee and use that as justification that the melee champions need help. The person who plays better should win. If all is even, many melees have a very reasonable chance fighting ranged.
Deliberate Inter1 votesIf you're going to use a tier list at least use someone like LS, LMAO.
Verxint1 votesIf your entire argument is an authority fallacy I don't know what to say to you. I'd rather use something generated by a variety of statistics that literally one persons opinion. You could at least link me to it, or make an argument against anything I've said here. Are you going to say that aren't very strong right now? Are you going to comment on how I explain the tools each of those champs have to engage range? Or are you just going to say "lol its not this one persons opinion so it's wrong"?
Deliberate Inter1 votesFirst, it isn't an argument, it's education. Second, nothing I said in any of my posts was fallacious. Third, you are not a statistician.
Kled and renekton are very weak right now , Jax is very niche and yorick and sion are fine.
Yorick has no reliable hard engage, renekton's is very situational and many kits can totally deny him, he is also a counter pick and gets absolutely shat on in lane by many picks including irelia, post nerfs urgot and the riven we already established is garbo right now. Kled has a bad kit, it's like picking kennen or jayce, even if he gets ahead, you still have the problem that you picked kled and Sion has no reliable engage at all, rather the opposite, his kit is super clunky and revolves around NA or EU style sloppiness. His purpose is instead zone control and meat shield things. Jax is in an okay state right now but he's a different animal entirely and there are lots of reasons to pick many champs over him.
Verxint1 votesIgnoring my arguments and saying statistics are not a valid metric is fallacious. Statistics matter, and saying that LS (or whoever) is going to be right is an authority fallacy.
Saying Riven is garbage is objectively incorrect. lolalytics - 54% winrate, 14% playrate op.gg - 54% winrate, 10% playrate We didn't "establish" that Riven is bad, you just claimed she was with no evidence except your own opinions. Objectively speaking she is performing very well with the new Conqueror and Spear of Shoujin being a great rush item on her if she's ahead. A champion as skill intensive as Riven having those kinds of winrates and those playrates means she's probably too strong, if anything.
Kleds performance, while not as high as Riven's, is still very impressive. It's clear that people who learn him are having absolutely no problem getting high quality results lolalytics - 54% winrate, 4% playrate op.gg - 52% winrate, 4% playrate Kled has a very strong kit with an amazing roam game, which is incredibly important in the current meta. When he gets ahead he is able to initiate fights for his entire team, force plays, and regularly 1v2 or 1v3.
Renekton. He was in a rut for a while, but as of the Conqueror changes his winrate climbed slightly for all players, significantly for experienced players, and his ban rate is increasing which means that at least other people don't think he is weak. He also completely trashes Irelia: using op.gg's matchup analysis (because it presents the most information), he has a combined winrate delta of 4 percentage points in his favor. He usually gets the first kill in lane and ends the game with a higher KDA. Renekton actually wins lane consistently against . Where he ends up losing is generally not the laning phase, it's getting outscaled. This is objectively demonstrated by his win rate per game length, which drops from 52% to 48% after 25 minutes. He doesn't get crushed in lane like your seem to think, he crushes his lane then loses if he can't transition that advantage into an early win which is exactly what he is designed to be
Champions don't need a reliable engage in order to be strong. You really like throwing that one around. Yorick doesn't need a reliable engage to be a constant source of pressure on your turrets and objectives, he forces you to fight him or he's going to take your inhib by 20 minutes. And if you do fight him, his kit lends himself to very potent dueling with strong damage from ghouls, high base and scaling on his Q, crazy base stats, and %HP magic damage from his maiden. Sion is one of the best picks in professional play and doesn't have a reliable engage. Every single champions kit is lacking something. This does not make them bad. You can make anyone seem bad by only listing their weaknesses and not their strengths, just like you can make anyone seem good by only listing their strengths and not their weaknesses. This is why statistics are a good way to objectively measure a champions performance, because they don't take personal hyperbole into account. Yorick is sitting at a 54% winrate and 8% pickrate right now. Clearly not having reliable engage is not an issue for his success.
Now, since you mentioned NA/EU style sloppiness, I can actually set lolalytics to only use data from Korea. And the top performers are..
S+
S
S- 
Interesting how in what is universally considered the best region in the game, the champion you insist is "garbo" has a 54% winrate, a 10% playrate, and is rated as the top performer. Interesting how two of the ones you say have "bad kits" and "even if you get ahead, you have the problem that you picked them" are both performing very well. Interesting how in the region where people playing ranged champions in top lane will most likely have the best mechanics, there are still only 5 ranged champs out of 17 in the highest tiers (if you consider Jayce ranged).
Pretty much everything you've said can be proven, objectively, to be wrong, based on statistics from the best region in the world. To claim that your personal opinion is somehow more important than raw data is not just fallacious, it's downright stupid. The numbers prove you wrong. Your, or LS or any random fucko you idolize, is not some objective gospel of truth. Statistics are not automatically true either, but when your claims, such as "Riven is garbo" so directly contradict the data, I'm going to trust the data more than your opinion. And when your opinion continues to contradict the data in multiple ways, it just makes it more likely that your opinion is crap.
I'll try to make this simple: If your only counter argument to this is "lol statistics, I have a different opinon", that is as much an argument as my farts.
Deliberate Inter1 votesYou didn't make any arguments. The first step would be the address the game itself, not the game as you imagine it based on statistics that you don't understand. The health of a game is not based on solo queue, the health of the game is based on balance in competitive play. The objective strength of a champion has nothing to do with performance at one time or another, by your logic, Garen is good because there is a korean challenger garen onetrick or teemo jungle is good because there is a NA jungle teemo one trick. Sorry, that isn't how it works. If you want me to debunk everything you're saying and really hold your hand through it the least you can do is hire me as a coach, lol.
Verxint1 votesSo literally "I disagree with the statistics therefore they must be wrong". Good to know.
The objective strength of a champion has nothing to do with performance at one time or another
So strong champions don't consistently perform well and weak champions don't consistently perform badly? That's why when a champion has 100% pick/ban and 75% winrate at worlds, Riot doesn't ever nerf them? I suppose Riot gimped Azir and Ryze because they weren't performing amazing in competitive play via objective measurements? The objective performance of a champion, when assessed with enough data, does tell you what is objectively strong. When champions are strong they perform well across a variety of players and regions. When they are weak they don't.
by your logic, Garen is good because there is a korean challenger garen onetrick or teemo jungle is good because there is a NA jungle teemo one trick.
Not at all. That's why you factor in playrate, matchup data, sample size, etc. Many of these are factored in the performance analysis algorithms these websites used. I decided not to remove the low playrate outliers from those tier lists because I wasn't sure what a good cutoff was, and I didn't list it all because that would be tedious. But for example, Talon and Zed both have <1% playrates, which suggests that they're very niche picks or played by onetricks who specialize in that matchup. But that also means it is a viable playstyle that someone could learn if they took the time. Generally its not worth the investment compared to other, simpler options, but it shows that it can be done. Furthermore, you're using one situation to try to argue for another. Jax, Irelia, Riven, Vlad, etc are not being picked by obsessive one tricks. They're common picks making up the top lane meta, so their statistics are reasonably valid. Riven is played in 10% of games. That's not onetricks. That's not just mains.
Far more people play in solo queue, including almost everyone on the boards, so the health of the game in solo queue is far more relevant to anyone here. I'm never going to be playing competitively, so I care about what champions are strong in solo queue. When you propose doubling the stats on Dorans items, most people here are going to think about how this affects their own gameplay, not competitive play. Ruining the game for 99.99% of the playerbase just because you think it doesn't matter is a terrible business model. The health of solo queue is much more important for the health of the game than competitive play.
When you discuss champion changes on the Boards, somewhere that is populated by regular players, not pro players, who play the regular solo queue game, it's generally assumed you refer to how this would affect solo Queue. I don't give a shit if Tahm Kench is amazing in competitive play, it will never affect me. As far as I'm concerned, his 46% winrate ass is shit, because in any situation where I am in game with him, he's going to be a detriment to our team. Tahm Kench is weak in solo queue, and that's all I care about. Riven is very strong in solo queue, and that's all I care about. Even in Challenger, solo queue is very different from professional play and it always will be. If I want to climb solo queue as a support, I should be picking Soraka or Pyke, not Tahm Kench, because those are the champions that are strong in the environment I play. If i try to climb in solo queue based on what is strong in competitive play, I will not have as much success as if I were to try to climb in solo queue based on what is strong in solo queue.
Champions that perform well in solo queue are strong in solo queue. Champions that perform well in competitive are strong in competitive. Statistics, used properly, are an objective measure of a champion's performance, regardless of whether you are looking at solo queue statistics or professional statistics. I am not a competitive player, so what is strong competitively is irrelevant to me. I am a solo queue player, so what is strong in solo queue is relevant to me.
Deliberate Inter1 votesWell then I can stop you right there, this one is an easy fix. A champion's objective strength is NOT a product of their performance. Their Objective strength is however a factor in how well they perform. Glad to sort that out for you.
Verxint1 votesTheir Objective strength is however a factor in how well they perform. Glad to sort that out for you.
That's the entirety of what I've been saying. Objective strength and performance share a causal relationship, and by analyzing performance metrics you can assess objective strength. You're just throwing semantics around for no reason. At no point did I state that the performance statistics are the cause and the strength is the effect, literally anyone with a brain knows which direction that goes. I only ever stated that statistics are an objective measure of a champions performance. To measure something means: "ascertain the size, amount, or degree of (something) by using an instrument or device marked in standard units or by comparing it with an object of known size." "estimate or assess the extent, quality, value, or effect of (something)" Statistics are a means to asses the extent, quality, value, or effect of a champion's strength in the game. If you use A to measure B, it's inherent that B is the independent value and the measurement A is dependent on the cause B. How did you ever get the idea that I, or literally anyone, thought it worked the other way around?