If League is a strategy game

xDogMeatx·Mar 30, 2019·2 votes·1,868 views

How does chess relate to it? Pawns-minions Rook -tanks Bishop- mages? Knight (horse) - assassins King/queen- adc/support Where do the rest of the classes go?

17 Comments

SanKakUMar 30, 20193 votes

More like: king -- towers, inhibitors, nexus. queen -- jungler rook -- top laner bishop -- bottom laner knight -- middle laner pawn -- support

if you lose your king, you lose the game if you lose your queen, you probably lose the objectives if you lose your rooks, your follow through on plays is missing if you lose the bishops, your threat potential suffers greatly if you lose your knights, your sneaky plays are almost impossible to pull off if you lose your pawns, everything is vulnerable

xDogMeatxMar 30, 20191 votes

See you get what I mean you got my vote.

SSJ Blue WukongMar 30, 20191 votes

[deleted]

xDogMeatxMar 30, 20192 votes

Let's just say they do. Hypothetically speaking. In terms of classes where would they reside.

RebonackMar 30, 20191 votes

League isn't a strategy game.

It's a tactics game.

xDogMeatxMar 30, 20192 votes

Isn't tactics the same thing. People call it RTS for a reason.

RebonackMar 31, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Isn't tactics the same thing. People call it RTS for a reason.

No, it isn't.

Strategy games have both micro and macro elements. The former is controlling your units. The latter is utilizing your resources to build your units (and decide which units to build).

A tactics game is micro only. Might be microing an army, a squad, or even a single unit.

Risk or Settlers of Katan are strategy games.

Warhammer is a tactics game.

xDogMeatxMar 31, 20191 votes

chess is still macro/micro plays which is big picture/little picture. each move is a micro move into the macro (overall objective control) big picture. which is still strategy by enabling kill zones while denying others onto less priority targets. or checking enemy king basically CCing them into making a move they really dont want to do but they have to therefore causing them to waste moves/pieces adding more kill zones.

RebonackMar 31, 20191 votes

{quoted}

chess is still macro/micro plays which is big picture/little picture. each move is a micro move into the macro (overall objective control) big picture. which is still strategy by enabling kill zones while denying others onto less priority targets. or checking enemy king basically CCing them into making a move they really dont want to do but they have to therefore causing them to waste moves/pieces adding more kill zones.

Macro/micro is less about big and little picture and more about what you're fundamentally doing.

As a quick rule of thumb, if the core mechanics of the game are centered around managing resources and building things, you're probably dealing with a strategy game. If the core mechanics are centered around managing units and destroying stuff, you're probably dealing with a tactics game.

Either can contain elements of the other, so the definition gets a little fuzzy sometimes. A strategy game can contain tactical elements, but it doesn't have to. And a tactics game can contain strategic elements, but it doesn't have to.

League is a game almost completely focused on tactical play, often to the exclusion of strategic play. There have been many cases where players have completely lost their shit over strategic play being the best way to deal with something. And Riot, likewise, has completely lost their shit over new forms of strategic play being employed (see: the reaction in S1 to the Roamer lane position, see: the reaction just recently to funneling).

xDogMeatxMar 31, 20191 votes

needs confirmation from with 3 other people to accept validation because i see as a form of chess. the boards consistently changes as the game goes on you dont see the pieces but they are there. thats why wards exist to highlight the board to allow flanks (usually stats determine whose piece gets taken here) thats my reasoning to thinking league is a big chess board. each champ is a piece and as @sankaku said the king is the nexus the queen though is the objectives like dragons/towers. (shikamaru quote is "ask yourself is who is the King" on shoji in league) if you know the answer thats what you protect. thats the supports job there to choose who lives and who to give up as a sacrifice.

league is kinda a hybrid of both it involves communication and setting up the pieces for possible takedowns while also claiming objectives to put a more power position on the board (aka the middle is the most dangerous yet advantagous)

RebonackMar 31, 20191 votes

{quoted}

needs confirmation from with 3 other people to accept validation because i see as a form of chess. the boards consistently changes as the game goes on you dont see the pieces but they are there. thats why wards exist to highlight the board to allow flanks (usually stats determine whose piece gets taken here) thats my reasoning to thinking league is a big chess board. each champ is a piece and as @sankaku said the king is the nexus the queen though is the objectives like dragons/towers. (shikamaru quote is "ask yourself is who is the King" on shoji in league) if you know the answer thats what you protect. thats the supports job there to choose who lives and who to give up as a sacrifice.

league is kinda a hybrid of both it involves communication and setting up the pieces for possible takedowns while also claiming objectives to put a more power position on the board (aka the middle is the most dangerous yet advantagous)

You're right.

Now, answer this question.

Do you create things in chess?

Or do you destroy them?

xDogMeatxMar 31, 20191 votes

You convert pawns (if possible) to control the field 'its the equivalent to gaining baron' while also forcing the king to submit. All other is irrelevant unless those pieces interfere with that objective. Destroy enemies to gain control of the field or force the king to make moves that would cost pieces. Force the enemy to make less optimal moves aka countering splitpushing like Tryndamere knowing you can't take him on by yourself so you force your team to a 3v4 which then control resides on the splitpusher's side there.

RebonackMar 31, 20191 votes

{quoted}

You convert pawns (if possible) to control the field 'its the equivalent to gaining baron' while also forcing the king to submit. All other is irrelevant unless those pieces interfere with that objective. Destroy enemies to gain control of the field or force the king to make moves that would cost pieces. Force the enemy to make less optimal moves aka countering splitpushing like knowing you can't take him on by yourself so you force your team to a 3v4.

You can upgrade some units in your army, but you don't create anything.

Chess is, at its core, a tactics game. Strategy can be applied to it, yes, but the main focus is tactics.

The best players in the world (lol bots) don't think ahead at all. They use no grand strategy. They simply apply a tactical analysis to all possible moves and then select the one most likely to lead to victory.

xDogMeatxMar 31, 20191 votes

I suppose that's valid logic there, there are those players who use tactics example users like LeeSin control the battlefield to their advantage. Those who use displacement attacks is a tactical advantage over say pure damage. Can't use damage if you control where that unit is at.