Stop balancing champions by watering down their strength with the same weakness.

GhostStalker·Oct 11, 2014·307 votes·43,511 views

You give Cassiopeia huge sources of Ability Power gains. You make her Ratio's abysmally small.
You give Garen Armor and Magic Resistance gains. You make his base Armor and Magic Resistance's small.
You give Sion increasing health gains. You make his base health abysmally small.
When are we going to see Veigar pay for his ability power gains? (You'd better not touch him).

This is an absolute terrible balancing method. What is the point of giving these champions strength's in these area's if you're just going to make them weaker in the SAME EXACT AREA for it. It feels bad. It looks bad. Because it's bad.

I would really like some sort of ..... clarification on why this is done this way. It's frustrating to see. It makes me feel like I have very little choice in the items I pick up because of how riot is performing balance on these types of champions.

EDIT cleaned up stuff....

248 Comments

RiotCertainlyTOct 12, 201493 votes

Let's call these sort of additive or multiplicative statistical bonuses "stat hyperscaling." Let's call reduced base stats on champions with stat hyperscaling "base offsets."

I see two variants of the argument presented in GhostStalker's post: 1) Some stat scaling bonuses are undertuned, so that the champion doesn't feel like they end up feeling benefited from their bonus; and 2) Champions with stat hyperscaling should not have lower base stats than their counterparts who lack those bonuses.

I'll not address #1 in depth, but have two short thoughts: First, you might be right. It's entirely possible we've undershot the mark in some places. Second, it is possible that you aren't getting the full benefit of some of these stat hyperscalings. As I'll talk about below, hyperscaling is designed to feel good when availed to its fullest.

As to point #2, this technique (stat hyperscaling with base offsets) allows us to do one of three things.

Create game-by-game variance in a champion's strength. We aren't interested in any champion *always *feeling superlative (tankiest, burstiest, etc.). Rather, we want players to have games where, due to an excellent performance, their champion achieves that feeling of being unkillable, or of annihilating an opponent in a single spell rotation. In the case of Sion, his HP/Level of 104 (currently 70) was retained for much of his rework's development. Feedback from nearly every playtest was that he felt unkillably tanky. After reducing his HP per level but keeping his W passive HP per kill high, Sion reached a point where he sometimes became a super tank and sometimes failed to do so, based upon the Sion players performance and the enemy team's ability to keep him from farming. This variance frequently results in player frustration when they fail with a champion and then fault base offsets for depriving them of their superlative quality. In reality, the offsets are not at fault, but rather the champion might be undertuned (so they did not have a fair shot at scaling), the hyperscalar may be undertuned (this is point #1), or the player may be not yet be optimizing their stat hyperscaling (i.e., they are bad, which is normal on newer champions or major reworks).
Create distinct gameplay through alternate incentives. Generally, we are happy with LoL's emphasis on Gold and EXP as a means of scaling stats. But in some cases, we like to emphasize one over the other. Garen, for example, emphasizes build choice over character level. He can customize his defensive strengths to suit the game at hand. Thresh emphasizes active resource acquisition (picking up souls) over passive resource acquisition (being in EXP range) because I wanted to both encourage the player to stay closer to the minion wave and to make the same sort of moment-to-moment decisions that come from last hitting. If Thresh tended to up with the exact same amount of armor as a base stat driven champion, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest, since I am happy with the distinct gameplay behind his armor growth.
Create intra-game variance, typically over time. This is most obvious on marksmen, who, as a class, tend to have substantial base offsets in exchange for hyperscaling. Similarly, with the Cassiopeia rework, RiotStashu sought to create a sustained damage mage with a marksman-like damage curve by moderating her early ratios in exchange for higher late game ratios (combined with less quantifiable usability changes that resulted in higher DPS). As such, Cassiopeia's power spike is later than a standard mage, and later than her previous self, which is undoubtedly jarring to some players.

GhostStalkerOct 12, 201424 votes

Huh. Thank's for the response. Some enlightening stuff here I didn't think about before. I think the biggest 2 things I took away from this was how Cassio has a Marksman like power curve and how that was accomplished, and that it would infact not be okay to leave Sion's base health alone, as you've said the feedback you recieved was that he felt too strong.

I think thresh is fine. I don't think anyone has a problem with how his armor gains and no armor work, because the rest of his kit is really cohesive and feels like he has power, and isn't being yanked on a chain (hah).

Sion just feels so overly undertuned in the form of the abundance of Counter-play, that I felt that maybe giving him MORE survivability would be the key in making him feel much better by allowing him to use more of his abilities during a fight since these abilities are very unreliable. I think sions a lot of fun to play personally, but I feel very useless on the guy a lot of the times, because on one hand if I build damage, i'll just die quickly or if I build for tankyness, I get ignored since I do no damage and my CC abilities are easily avoided. I identified what I saw as a problem (his health being really low compared to virtually everyone) and saw that he lost much of his damage. I felt that sense you guys took his damage away, you just wanted him to be a tank. So I thought that giving him more of his base HP would be what solves this problem I feel Sion has. Hopefully that makes sense.

This is the exact kind of post I was looking for. Thank you VERY much. Really.

DrukyulOct 12, 201438 votes

Cassio has a Marksman like power curve and how that was accomplished

No. Marksmen/hypercarries that get a BF sword advantage due to kills have a huge advantage in lane. For Cassi, even if she gets an item advantage her ratios are such shit that it doesn't matter. She has to get to late game.

WreckdomreckOct 13, 20141 votes

Cassio has a Marksman like power curve and how that was accomplished

No. Marksmen/hypercarries that get a BF sword advantage due to kills have a huge advantage in lane. For Cassi, even if she gets an item advantage her ratios are such shit that it doesn't matter. She has to get to late game.

So does nasus, and Azir. Nasus just cant teamfight without his q stacks and azir is completly and absolutly dependant on his items, those guys have to get to late game to become relevent as well.

DrukyulOct 13, 20144 votes

So does nasus, and Azir. Nasus just cant teamfight without his q stacks and azir is completly and absolutly dependant on his items, those guys have to get to late game to become relevent as well.

Somewhat, but not really. A Nasus that has an item advantage can do amazing things with <500 stacks. An Azir with an item advantage is scary as hell. A Cass with an item advantage barely catches up to casters with fewer items until the 40-min mark.

RiotCertainlyTOct 13, 201426 votes

Again, Cassiopeia could be undertuned at the moment. My point was to explain why we use the *curves *we do, not to claim that we get everything exactly right.

As to Cass and the BF Sword analogy, Marksmen have more multiplicative scaling through itemization (AS, Crit, Crit Damage, %Pen) than casters (AP, Deathcap passive, and somewhat CDR). Cassio's passive AP amplification isn't intended to compete with BF sword, it's intended to scale her damage in the same way PD/Shiv scales up IE.

It's also worth noting that Marksmen as a class are probably stronger than is long term ideal for the game, so comparing Cassio to Trist-from-last-patch is dangerous.

Earl EulrichOct 13, 201412 votes

oh well, her best-case certainly is fairly overtuned - as there´s no way to protect yourself from macigal-dps in this game: MR Items are focused on guarding against burst-patterns, so Cassio just now is about the most frightening thing you can ever encounter lategame if you don´t have someone that can reliably shut her down.

The problem is...everything that is not her best-case is close to unplayable. So for the most time she´s unfun for the Cassio-Player - and once she´s fun for the Cassio-Player she gets very frustrating for everyone else. I think having early/mid and lategame-focused Champs is alright, but you should never put it to such extremes as with Cassio currently: It´s just not fun for anyone.

Blunts4BrekfastOct 13, 201432 votes

Again, Cassiopeia could be undertuned at the moment. My point was to explain why we use the *curves *we do, not to claim that we get everything exactly right.

As to Cass and the BF Sword analogy, Marksmen have more multiplicative scaling through itemization (AS, Crit, Crit Damage, %Pen) than casters (AP, Deathcap passive, and somewhat CDR). Cassio's passive AP amplification isn't intended to compete with BF sword, it's intended to scale her damage in the same way PD/Shiv scales up IE.

It's also worth noting that Marksmen as a class are probably stronger than is long term ideal for the game, so comparing Cassio to Trist-from-last-patch is dangerous.

all I know about Cass is the fact that the midlaner in my ranked team who used to play cass a ton wont do it anymore because she says Cass is garbage until 40 mins in. i dont like when my midlaners champion pool becomes smaller because you think she should start from the "deepest valley" in the early game. she clearly doesnt enjoy playing Cass anymore, as she outright refuses. so if your goal with Cass was to make players enjoy the game, I dont think its working.

just based on my personal experience.

Kowe The EwokOct 13, 20149 votes

Again, Cassiopeia could be undertuned at the moment. My point was to explain why we use the *curves *we do, not to claim that we get everything exactly right.

As to Cass and the BF Sword analogy, Marksmen have more multiplicative scaling through itemization (AS, Crit, Crit Damage, %Pen) than casters (AP, Deathcap passive, and somewhat CDR). Cassio's passive AP amplification isn't intended to compete with BF sword, it's intended to scale her damage in the same way PD/Shiv scales up IE.

It's also worth noting that Marksmen as a class are probably stronger than is long term ideal for the game, so comparing Cassio to Trist-from-last-patch is dangerous.

There is a big ptobrlem with this sinking. PD / Shiv apply on every point AD you invest and IE adds another even more to it than Deatchcap ever could. AP are tied to scaling. Wich is actly what the open most meant. You (ok, not you but stashu), gave her "hyperscaling" while destroying her scaling. She lost a good passive and massive amount of lane presence and the ability to roam freely.

Also the "false hyperscaling" kicks in here. It's inconsistent: you only get power every now and then. It has a limit compared to true hyper sclaers like Veigar.

But anyways what truely bothers my: WHY GIVE FALSE HYPERSCALING TO AM EXISTING CHAMPION? A CHAMPION EHO USED TO BE THE EXACT OPPOSITE, A LANE BULLY? That's like making Maokai an AD carry.

I m sorry for being a little bit enraged, it's not your fault. It's just that Stashu ignores a few 290 page topic about how horrible the new Cassio and especially the new passive is.

I just want Riot to know that it's absolutely enraging for mains of certain champions to decide that they suddenly start off completely useless and have to hyperscale, while they used to be lane bullies before. Imagine what Yasuo fans would say if he suddenly had to farm 300 minions to get his passive while his Q dealt rougly a 3rd of what it used to be ( Cassio Q used to be at 0.9, shtashu set it to a longer delay higher cooldown and 0.35 and wow it's at 0.45 now....)

Seriously giving hyperscaling to existing champions is the worst thing you can do to them. Really, there's a reason why nobody plays Veigar. Wh ruin Cassio?

Kowe The EwokOct 13, 201412 votes

Again, Cassiopeia could be undertuned at the moment. My point was to explain why we use the *curves *we do, not to claim that we get everything exactly right.

As to Cass and the BF Sword analogy, Marksmen have more multiplicative scaling through itemization (AS, Crit, Crit Damage, %Pen) than casters (AP, Deathcap passive, and somewhat CDR). Cassio's passive AP amplification isn't intended to compete with BF sword, it's intended to scale her damage in the same way PD/Shiv scales up IE.

It's also worth noting that Marksmen as a class are probably stronger than is long term ideal for the game, so comparing Cassio to Trist-from-last-patch is

Cassiopeia's main role used to be a lanebully and roaming punisher to those who wouldn't ward and run straightface into her ultimate. Why make her the exact opposite? A weak laner who gets punished for roaming by loosing stacks (which simply are a delayed sclaing. ) What made you think that would please her playerbase?

P.S. isn't that already hilarious? Delayed SCALING... Find the mistake.

CanastusOct 13, 201421 votes

She's undeniably worse than before, even a mere AP support can outdamage Cass now if you take a look at the endgame-stats of any of her matches.

She used to hit people for at least 40.000-60.000 damage per game with her poison alone (up to 80.000 if the match went on long enough), now she's lucky enough if she even reaches 20k in an average game. I feel downright useless since I hardly contribute to the success of my team, that's a statistically proven fact.

Also this reliance on a short range single target ability to even deal damage is simply impractical. What she needs are her poison ratios restored to her pre-rework values and her overall mana-costs lowered, period. Maybe then we'll finally see an improvement in her damage-department.

Stashu claimed this rework wouldn't be a nerf, its goal would be to deal "tons of damage". And yet you managed to turn the once unrivaled queen of dps into an utter joke, entirely unable of staging a comeback the second she falls behind in lane thus delaying her incredibly questionable scaling into lategame even more.

She's easily the most unreliable champion in the game at this point, because of this she'll never be viable - this rework has failed to meet any of its goals. And yet you refuse to touch her, no matter how bad the situation is. Your decision making is incomprehensible.

Kowe The EwokOct 14, 20148 votes

She's undeniably worse than before, even a mere AP support can outdamage Cass now if you take a look at the endgame-stats of any of her matches.

She used to hit people for at least 40.000-60.000 damage per game with her poison alone (up to 80.000 if the match went on long enough), now she's lucky enough if she even reaches 20k in an average game. I feel downright useless since I hardly contribute to the success of my team, that's a statistically proven fact.

Also this reliance on a short range single target ability to even deal damage is simply impractical. What she needs are her poison ratios restored to her pre-rework values and her overall mana-costs lowered, period. Maybe then we'll finally see an improvement in her damage-department.

Stashu claimed this rework wouldn't be a nerf, its goal would be to deal "tons of damage". And yet you managed to turn the once unrivaled queen of dps into an utter joke, entirely unable of staging a comeback the second she falls behind in lane thus delaying her incredibly questionable scaling into lategame even more.

She's easily the most unreliable champion in the game at this point, because of this she'll never be viable - this rework has failed to meet any of its goals. And yet you refuse to touch her, no matter how bad the situation is. Your decision making is incomprehensible.

His communication is incomprehensible. Create a topic, post once. Ignore several hundred posts. Create a new topic, ignore it - cause somebody might have arguments you can't deny.

And the most important part: Don'y sticky topics, you want them to disappear. People will eventually stop commenting if it disappears without any further response.

If this doesn't work, repeat until it works.

Wait there's a more important part. Get paid while you're working on your ability ignore feedback or valid complaints.

Sorry, for being polemic here - but this is EXACTLY what happened. Several hundred PAGES in a single topic. 40+ post topics popping up each day. The only post that ever got a direct responsewas to that single guy with less than 10 Cassiopeia gamea total who complimented him on the rework.

Ignorance is a blizz. If I'ld do that to our clients I'ld be fired in a day. Kudos to Riot how much they stand behind their employees.

RiotCertainlyTOct 13, 201420 votes

GhostStalker, As I mentioned, it is possible that Sion is undertuned (i.e., weak). After all, he just came out. It's also possible that you are not playing him correctly (after all, he just came out ;-).

It's also possible that Sion just isn't for you. A lot of Sion's power lies in zoning enemies outside of your Q range. If you enjoy landing every spell, rather than scattering enemies, you probably will not enjoy Sion. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't much overlap between the Leona/Maokai player who enjoys reliably landing spells and the Sion/Cho'Gath player who enjoys reliable manipulating the enemy position through the threat of more powerful but less reliable spells.

NicarasuOct 13, 20144 votes

Well, I just had a game as the new Sion, and I have found a new worst feeling in the world. It feels really cool when Sion goes berserk from his passive, but then it just feels awful as you are either cc'ed for the duration or they just walk away from you (And you can't catch them). All I ask is to add some strength to go with the gratuitous counterplay. His passive shouldn't be completely irrelevant. His ult shouldn't be easily neutered. I like the direction his kit went, but it's not enough. He needs better numbers, or an improvement of his passive and ulty. You can't have it both ways, with this hyperscaling crap and the too easily countered ult and passive. Seriously though, an enemy Azir basically removes Sion from the game. Where's that counterplay now, huh?

Earl EulrichOct 13, 20143 votes

I really have other experiences with the passive...you can use it to clean up, to burn summoners, to hit objectives and to just zone someone away (which is your main purpose when playing Sion anyway). His kit really works great as a Initiating-Frontliner - though i know this is sth. very very few players actually understand how to play, as you won´t get much credit for zoning away opponent carries so your carries can shine. It´s just about being the unsung hero of a Clash.

NicarasuOct 13, 20142 votes

The problem is, do your teammates know to capitalize on zoning? You make a fair point though, I just expected, I don't know, more from his passive.

Earl EulrichOct 13, 20145 votes

Well yea, but if you design a champion around your teammates playing like bots you´ll run into serious troubles ;) He certainly isn´t a monster for SoloQ atm, but he has great potential for organised 5v5. And if you like playing frontline he´s already quite fun. Though i wouldn´t mind adding some more tenacity on the passive or allowing him to break CC with his speed-burst - a man that´s resilent enough to hold back death shouldn´t be stopped by a mere binding.

Earl EulrichOct 12, 201427 votes

While I agree with you for the most part

As such, Cassiopeia's power spike is later than a standard mage, and later than her previous self, which is undoubtedly jarring to some players.

This really is a brutal understatement. Almost any Cassio-Player did choose her for her strong laning and midgame-teamfighting - now it´s completely shifted around to an "all about the lategame(that never happened)"-champ. That rework really should have been trying to be more in line with her identity and playstyle.

GhostStalkerOct 12, 201414 votes

I think this is a special case where the players had one identity lined up for Cassio, and Riot had another.

ThryaleOct 12, 20146 votes

Yeah, back when I did pick cass, I always picked her cuz she was reliable early, good mid, and great late. but now she's trash early, mediocre mid(assuming you make it out of the early game) and only good late game.

JryiahOct 12, 2014124 votes

Create game-by-game variance in a champion's strength. We aren't interested in any champion *always *feeling superlative (tankiest, burstiest, etc.).

This is already achieved with the gold system. If a player is behind in gold, they will not be able to get the items to do the things you are talking about, let alone work on there stats. If they have an excellent game, they will feel rewarded regardless if you offset the base or not.

By offsetting the base to account for a strength, you are effectively double dipping on the negative impact when behind. Now not only are they behind in gold, but also they have a glaring weakness on what was supposed to be a benefit.

WertilqOct 12, 20146 votes

That is what you get for playing a hyper-scaling champ. If you play Vayne or Tristana and get bullied in lane, and assassins jumping you ass constantly, you will have very low impact, and there wont be any hyper-scaling from your side you will be weak,squishy and deal low damage.

It's the same for a tank, there are hyper-scaling tanks, that just becomes immovable objects that need a full team to take down, and unless you do something really stupid/aggressive you wont die.

It's high risk high reward pattern.

CupcakeTrapOct 13, 20146 votes

It's high risk high reward pattern.

Exactly. Low floor, high ceiling. This is the basic carry pattern.

A Champion with high scaling AND a strong early game would simply be broken-OP.

Dominick DestineOct 13, 201418 votes

It's high risk high reward pattern.

Exactly. Low floor, high ceiling. This is the basic carry pattern.

A Champion with high scaling AND a strong early game would simply be broken-OP.

Yasuo.

Jamatrix666Oct 12, 201456 votes

This comment is 100% accurate and describes well the nature of the issue.

Riot, give different weakness on champions, different than their hyperscaling aspect. Having their early weakness being their late game strength is odd, illogic and not fun at all.

ZanphyraOct 12, 201434 votes

Yeah... That and the new sion feels like the embodiment of counterplay. Nothing he does feels like it is his doing. Just the enemy making MASSIVE mistakes. Everything in his kit is easily avoided, and he isn't tanky enough to warrant this amount of counterplay.

CupcakeTrapOct 13, 201413 votes

(Note: Not commenting on Cass specifically, but rather on the general concepts being discussed here.)

How is CertainlyT's post getting downvoted for discussing early/late tradeoffs and variant types of power curves? This is completely standard.

Linear warriors, quadratic wizards, and cubic carries.

If you make a Champion with insane scaling also have uncommonly strong starting stats, they're simply OP. You pay for the high ceiling with a low floor.

Example Power/Gold Curves

A while ago, I plugged some numbers into a DPS calculation site and computed these DPS values. (Note: Janna's DPS is not where most of her power comes from. The graph might make it look like Janna is much worse, but remember that she also has really powerful utility that holds about constant all match. This makes her stronger early. She has a high floor and a low ceiling.)

Janna http://i.imgur.com/2xG0jby.png

Veigar http://i.imgur.com/BADq6G1.png

Caitlyn http://i.imgur.com/OyD4uCk.png

This fits with theory. (Okay, technically the graphs above are an order off the "classical" statement, but they also don't account for CDR and such.) Supports, especially back in the days of extreme Support starvation, held their role because they had the most "base power" of any Champion. A level 1 itemless Blitz hook is remarkably close to a level 18 full-items Blitz hook in its basic effect. (Contrast: an Ashe auto at level 1 with no items versus a fed Ashe level 18 auto.)

Mages are decent in the early game and peak in the midgame before falling off relative to carries.

(AD) Carries have a trashy early game and a mediocre midgame, but have the highest scaling of any Champion. They're literally of a higher order: they multiply more factors together. Attack Speed and Attack Damage don't independently increase DPS, they synergistically increase it: It's AD * AS, not AD + AS. That means that you get the most bang for your buck when you evenly distribute these stats, with their various coefficients in mind. (As with any optimization problem, e.g., to bound the largest rectilinear area with a given length of fencing material you use a square.)

For a numerical example, take a pile of points and assign them to the following formulae, into any of the variables. (I'm simplifying a bit with the orders, because of how this seems to work within the specific bounds of gold/items attainable in a LoL match.)

Support: 50+.5x Mostly constant power, from non-scaling or low-scaling utility like most CC.

Mage: .1*x*y AP and MPen multiply each other's effects. (CDR being left out for simplification reasons.)

Carry: .01*x*y*z AS, AD, and Crit all multiply each other's effects. (Omitting ArPen, as with mages and CDR, to keep it simpler. The overall picture is the same.)

At 25 points

Blitzcrank Support: 50+.5x --> 63

Annie Mage: .1*x*y --> 14

Vayne Carry: .01*x*y*z --> 5

At 50 points

Blitzcrank Support: 50+.5x --> 75

Annie Mage: .1*x*y --> 63

Vayne Carry: .01*x*y*z --> 41

At 100 points

Blitzcrank Support: 50+.5x --> 100

Annie Mage: .1*x*y --> 250

Vayne Carry: .01*x*y*z --> 359

Earl EulrichOct 13, 20142 votes

While I do agree that downvoting Certainlyt is not really nice here, he sure did start a rather productive discussion with his post - but I think you take things far too simple here.

e.g. your curves suggest a very steady powercurve for Caitlyn, while in the practical game she has a dominant early-game, but a very lackluster midgame (if she´s not already far ahead)...and a good late, due to her abilitay to position savely - not as much due to her scalings. There is just to much that has to be taken into account apart from raw-dps to see how a champ works throughout the game: Thus you should be very carefull about making generalisations: It´s better to either talk about one specific Champion in detail or to talk about the surrounding mechanics in general (like certainlyt did to a point).

CupcakeTrapOct 13, 20144 votes

I agree that it's more complex than a simple DPS versus gold graph. That said, I would point out that your description of Caitlyn's power progression matches the general picture: supports dominate early but don't ramp up much, mages hit their stride in the midgame and then start to fall off (Veigar falls off less than others due to factors not captured above), carries are weak early and mediocre in the midgame but can score lategame pentas.

The general community opinion seems to be "if Champions hyperscale in some area, they should start off strong in that area, too", which seems like a very strange idea to me.

The best I can do with it is assume they mean something like, "yes, higher-scaling Champions are weaker early, but what strength they do have should be focused in their hyperscaling area."

But then I read comments like the one about how "if they're weak early, they'll never get fed enough to hyperscale". That's just the nature of snowballing, isn't it? You carry the ADC early, so they can carry you later.

Earl EulrichOct 13, 201410 votes

carries are weak early and mediocre in the midgame but can score lategame pentas.

this is just another myth...there are exceptional carries for every part of the game (e.g. caitlyn early (fastpush), vayne mid-late as a duelist, corki for midgame teamfights,...) + all carries are excellent sololaners. If you watch any pro-matches you´ll often notice sth. like kog or twitch is left alone in lane vs a maokai or ryze because they can easily handle their own with their early-dmg, kiting + the ability to constantly push in via AA-dps. They don´t have a support because they need one to defend them - they have a support because the classical solo-laners can make better use of an exp lead while carries scale well enough with gold alone. It´s just the most efficient way to share the limited ressources.

The general community opinion seems to be "if Champions hyperscale in some area, they should start off strong in that area, too", which seems like a very strange idea to me.

So I think this is the real important topic: I think it´s important here to make sure a Champion has enough weaknesses to make up for his strenghts, but it´s not really necessary that it´s in his powercurve. Vayne is a good example here I think: she already has a strong early with an exceptional powerspike on lvl 6/finished Botrk - as a Duelist. But making her work in teamfights really needs a lot investment from all of her team and good mechanics on her own, as she´s rather easily to shut down due to her short range. So while she is hyperscaling - she still is strong at any point in the game, but there´s always sth. you can do against her aswell. Cassio on the other hand is just plainly underwhelming early on, but depressing to play against once she finally gets going and comes at you with 1200dps+

So I think it´s really important to hit a delicate balance here that still makes playing as and vs a Champ good at all points in the game. If this cannot be achieved than a Champ needs to be changed...hyperscaling just for the sake of hyperscaling should not have a place in the League (or whatever it is now sigh)

CupcakeTrapOct 13, 20144 votes

there are exceptional carries for every part of the game

True. I often think that it would be neat if Riot published general powercurve info for each Champion. Their role is a first-order approximation of that, it's true, but it might be helpful for new people to get a basic indicator of their scaling.

a place in the League (or whatever it is now sigh)

I feel you, EUW-bro.

Sire HippingtonOct 12, 20145 votes

The thing with hyperscaling is that worst and best case tend to differ rather greatly, and if the difference between best and worst case gets to big, things become problematic. For sion that currently is the case. His worst case is rather dominant and very fustraiting, but if only his base haealth gets buffed, his best case would be overpowering and opressing to face. So imo his base health needs to be increased and the helath from W decreased to get best-/worst-case closer together.

And about Powercurves, i think it's fine if some champs focus more on the early and some more on the late, but just as with hyperscaling, u need to be carefull to not get to extreme. A champ that is way to weak early but insane strong late is unhealthy for the game. In the early, it's not very fun for the one playing, and it'S a burden for his team, but in the late things switch around, and while it'S a plesure for the one playing and nice for his team, it becomes pretty frustraiting for the opposing team. That also goes the other way around, a very strong early champ that falls off alot in the late isn'T very appealing and bad for gamehealth if strong. Cassio currently falls in the first category, to weak early, and kinda to strong late. I think even with focuse on early or mid or late, every champ should still be able to meaningfully contribute to his team throughout the entire game, which for some champions currently isn't true.

junglerboy16Oct 13, 20143 votes

No, having a strong early and weak late (and vice versa) is not unhealthy, it is important for game diversity and strategy in the game. Half of the strategy in the game is figuring out if you can win early enough to beat your late scaling opponent, or on the other side, if you can extend the game long enough to out scale your opponent. Only in super extreme cases were it is impossible to survive early but if by some freak chance you do you become a god (Cass, Poppy) is this unhealthy for the game. Hyperscaling is not an unhealthy mechanic in the game unless it goes from 100% counter play to 0% counter play. Only when a character's power curve during a game is this binary is it a bad thing. Nasus is an example of hyper scaling that is relatively well balanced (not perfect, but pretty good): he requires farm for his Q and is weak early, but he has ways to prevent being totally shut down. Late game he is still moderately kiteable and doesn't scale out of hand unless nobody did anything about his early game. Usually he ends up stronger than average, but never brokenly strong. Poppy (love this champ!) however, is the iconic flip flop champ for hyperscaling: She goes from a pitiful early game that is almost impossible to survive if your opponent has a brain, and turns into an uncounterable 1v5 pent kill monster if left unchecked late game.

TLDR: Having different power curves is essential to game diversity and only bad if veeeery extreme.

Sire HippingtonOct 13, 20143 votes

to quote my self:

i think it's fine if some champs focus more on the early and some more on the late, but just as with hyperscaling, u need to be carefull to not get to exterem.

this sounds rather similar to ur TLDR for me.... yes, it is healthy for the game to have different powercurves, but it is bad to go to extreme. The point we apparently differ is when a powercurve is extreme. U say in ur post a power curve is only unhealthy if it goes from 100% counterplay to 0%. For me it starts to become extreme and with that unhealthy sooner than that.

AzlagorOct 15, 20144 votes

Don'T u two say pretty much the same? Don Pavoni:

it's fine if some champs focus more on the early and some more on the late, but just as with hyperscaling, u need to be carefull to not get to exterem.

junglerboy16:

Having different power curves is essential to game diversity and only bad if veeeery extreme.

the only part u differ is in when it is to extreme, and ihave to agree with the Don here, a champion like poppy or cassio definitly is already to extreme in it'S powercurve, and the same can be said about pant or udyr(or even lee, it'S pretty horrible to face such an overpowering earlygame)

PartyxdayOct 13, 20146 votes

Garen, for example, emphasizes build choice over character level. He can customize his defensive strengths to suit the game at hand.

Then why don't we see build variance? Are you against AD? Sunfire/Randuins. They have AP: Banshees Veil/Spirit Visage. They have CC? Merc Treads. This build path can be used for every toplaner wanting to be tanky, with little to no thought put into the build.

The problem with league is that the items are just bundles of stats that really just boil down to "what's the most gold efficient. " You can't argue that Garen needs to think about his build and have his other stats suffer when Shyvana, Trundle, Mundo, Maokai, or just about any other top laner can buy of a checklist and have their stats be fine.

If Garen's extra armor and Magic resist was combined with every item giving overall less armor and magic resist and being more situational, then I'd agree that he would need to think about how he builds, and be rewarded for it. But since Mundo can build tankier and be more useful, we don't see garen picked all that often.

This cuts into a deeper problem of the game where all items are slot efficient AND gold efficient. If we had infinite inventory spaces everyone would just be buying doran's rings and doran's blades as they are both over 130% gold efficient, however, since we only have 6, they fall off as they are not slot efficient.

However, every item past this is both and bought purely for it being both. Why does deathcap give 30 percent extra AP and the max amount of base AP an item can have? There is no situation where a Mage reliant of AP and intent of stacking a lot of it would not buy this item. Why is the Infinity edge 106% efficient without it's passive? There is no ADC who wouldn't want the passive, and giving it great base stats makes it even more godly.

KhristophorosOct 13, 20146 votes

Well in theory, when you buy an item that is both slot efficient and gold efficient, the opportunity cost is that you didn't buy some other item which is competitive with it.

But for some reason not all items are gold efficient. You pay extra for Frozen Mallet's passive which means it's generally not a competitive option. Less competitive options means you don't have to think about as many options. The items aren't competing for your inventory slots.

Hinagiku33Oct 11, 201458 votes

I saw some numbers on Sion. Apparently he needs farm about 300 minions to get to his old base health. Never mind that he used to get that base health on top of his old health stacking. And it wasn't really an issue. AD Carries could still burn him down and the only really problems he had were wonky, high AP ratios with a targeted stun. It isn't that Sion takes longer to get to where he used to be, he will NEVER get there PERIOD.

Cassiopeia is the same problem where Riot gave her a sizable AP gain, but then tanked her ratios. New Cass' damage is complete garbage compared to what she used to be early and even mid game. She can get higher DPS late game, but only on a single target. New Cass completely loses all the AoE damage that Old Cass had and gets nothing to compensate, in addition to now being much worse at all stages of the game except maybe the last 2 minutes.

Riot has been making it very hard for me to care about this game at all lately, and I too would love a good explanation for this completely unsatisfying mwthod of balance.

Pro-Tip:

Giving a character higher damage and compensating with less defense is balance.

Giving a character less damage in the early game but higher damage in the late game is balance.

Making a character's abilities a bit stronger but also raising the cooldowns to make their use meaningful is still balance.

Taking away huge chunks of a character's damage and forcing them to work all game just to get where they used to be mid-game or so is just terrible.

NakedGrannyOct 12, 201411 votes

It's called "nerfing".

And it happens because power creep is a huge problem for a game as old as LoL, and if something isn't done to stop it, then you get far more serious frustrations in the game than a few power-wanking tryhards typing angry posts about how their old hobby horse just can't faceroll like she used to.

Nerfs are a legitimate part of game balance and design. Deal with it.

VoidgolemOct 12, 201412 votes

It's called "nerfing".

And it happens because power creep is a huge problem for a game as old as LoL, and if something isn't done to stop it, then you get far more serious frustrations in the game than a few power-wanking tryhards typing angry posts about how their old hobby horse just can't faceroll like she used to.

Nerfs are a legitimate part of game balance and design. Deal with it.

Reminder that morg is basically unchanged since open beta and Lee/Vi have been Junglers #1/2 since S2/S3.

But no we gotta dumpster this one lesser used champion ASAP. Because strengths and weaknesses.

ProfDrDeathOct 12, 201411 votes

Morgana was HEAVILY nerfed during the course of S2, if you'd care to remember. She was THE mid pick back then, and a permaban at every ELO.

RaptameiOct 12, 201423 votes

Passive: free spell every once in a while! Q: 85 mana

Lissandra

Kowe The EwokOct 12, 201423 votes

@Riot CertainlyT The main issue is that you start giving hyperscaling to characters which it doesn't belong to (Reference: Cassiopeia). She's a great example how NOT to do it.

1.) She didn't used to be a hyperscaling character. The rework completely failed to reflect her playstyle and disappointed her playerbase.

2.) Her "hyperscaling" is captured. Meaning: She basically has no hyperscaling. She reaches a point where she can't scale any further. Making it very frustrating - because she still suffers extremely early on to pay for her "hyperscaling"

3.) The playstyle is dull and boring, forcing champions to heavily focus on this makes them unfun to play. It's ok for new champions, but making it the most important aspect of a kit when reworking a champion dooms him. There's a reason why nobody plays Veigar - or played Sion before and Nasus doesn't make it into competitive play.

4.) The way how hyperscaling works also is very important. Veigar and co get continious bonuses, while Cassiopeia has breakpoints - which makes it very frustrating and unfun to play her now; other hyperscalers at least feel like you "gain" something for CS. For her it's 6 minutes of nothingness each time.

5.) These stack-farm passives force players to stay in lane. Putting it on a ganker or roamer (like Sion or Cass). Completely DESTROYS their former playstyle and power. Making it unappealing for former fans to play her. The most important aspect: Instead of promoting teamplay it punishes you for it.

CanastusOct 12, 201422 votes

Riot really couldn't care less about Cassiopeia at this point, it's really maddening. It took Stashu 3 weeks to finally show up again just to tell us that basically nothing is planned in the immediate future and that they'll never revert the rework, they literally abandoned Cass after they were done with the gutting.

Stashu's own thread already disappeared in the depths of the board after merely 48 hours, he didn't even care to pin it. Shows how much they really care about this champion. Riot knows no respect for Cassiopeia's playerbase at all.

Kowe The EwokOct 12, 20149 votes

Riot really couldn't care less about Cassiopeia at this point, it's really maddening. It took Stashu 3 weeks to finally show up again just to tell us that basically nothing is planned in the immediate future and that they'll never revert the rework, they literally abandoned Cass after they were done with the gutting.

Stashu's own thread already disappeared in the depths of the system after merely 48 hours, he didn't even care to pin it. Shows how much they really care about this champion. Riot knows no respect for Cassiopeia's playerbase at all.

Not to mention the sheer ignorance. He posts his points - and disappears. He absolutely doesn't answer concerns. He absolutely doesn't bother. Sure he might have his reasoning, but people pointed out many flaws. Yet he ignores them instead of re-thinking if the community with many experienced Cassiopeia players might know a little bit more about her. Especially statments like "Zyra is a DoT mage" are saddening, since he apparently doesn't even know what he's talking about (Zyra is a DPS mage, not DoT. DoT refers to damaging debuffs over time only).

Nucleophilic atkOct 11, 201410 votes

Not saying I agree, but I think I know why the do it. If they think a champion should have a strong late game but a weak early game, they might nerf base stats and increase scaling. This would satisfy both of their issues.

DropFillOct 11, 20145 votes

Not saying I agree, but I think I know why the do it. If they think a champion should have a strong late game but a weak early game, they might nerf base stats and increase scaling. This would satisfy both of their issues.

Cassiopeia never had a good early game. They nerfed sion's health gains when killing minions. And also nerfed his base health. Makes no sense ( his kit is still a mess too )

Serpents EmbraceOct 11, 201439 votes

Cassiopeia never had a good early game.

Wrong.

She was a lane bully since her release, especially at her release. At the time the only champion that wasn't out-matched by her poke range was Lux. A poke ability on a 3 second cooldown is what made her lane what it was. It's what allowed her to keep opponent's at arm's length. Similar to Anivia's threat of a stun (and Anivia comparisons are very important when talking about Cassiopeia because of how she was initially designed - a point that's totally lost on Stashu).

Cassiopeia's early game was always amazing which is why the butchering of her power curve is so obvious and detrimental. Not to mention what the OP here has pointed out - she can reach huge heights of AP but then can't really do anything with them. She gets the same benefits at 700 AP that she used to get around 300 AP - which is more realistic given her typical build paths never really focused on stacking AP anyway.

DropFillOct 11, 20142 votes

Cassiopeia never had a good early game.

Wrong.

She was a lane bully since her release, especially at her release. At the time the only champion that wasn't out-matched by her poke range was Lux. A poke ability on a 3 second cooldown is what made her lane what it was. It's what allowed her to keep opponent's at arm's length. Similar to Anivia's threat of a stun (and Anivia comparisons are very important when talking about Cassiopeia because of how she was initially designed - a point that's totally lost on Stashu).

Cassiopeia's early game was always amazing which is why the butchering of her power curve is so obvious and detrimental. Not to mention what the OP here has pointed out - she can reach huge heights of AP but then can't really do anything with them. She gets the same benefits at 700 AP that she used to get around 300 AP - which is more realistic given her typical build paths never really focused on stacking AP anyway.

Weird, because I have never seen a Cassiopeia being a lane bully against anyone except Ryze.

GhostStalkerOct 11, 201419 votes

Cassipeia used to be a massive lane bully. You could all in someone at level 2. You could Max Q to be a giant butthole (it had like a .8 ratio and high base damage and hard to dodge) and then E them down.

Now she doesn't really do much damage anymore because she doesn't have high base values, she has low AP values, and they increased the delay on her Q making it easier to dodge. They also increased the cooldown on it until you reach a certain amount of passive stacks.

The proper word to describe what has been done to her, and others like her is annoying.