@Feral Pony Questions about unpopular items

Jingerbeardman·Mar 28, 2014·8 votes·8,391 views

I have been wondering as of late if some of the more unpopular items like executioners calling, atmas impaler, and sword of the divine are being considered for slight changes to make them more appealing/viable things to build.

Atmas impaler in particular has been on my mind a lot lately and I have been trying to experiment with it in different ways. Whenever I do buy it though I get a lot of flak from my teammates that I am trolling for buying it. I feel like if it had at least 15 attack damage in addition to its passive that it might be considered a more viable pick.

If executioners calling were to have something it could build into I think it might get picked up more.

I have no idea about sword of the divine though.

Has there been any talk about these items as of late?

continuation of discussion

http://community.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/balance/NWpfwOcy-feralpony-questions-about-unpopular-items-continued

100 Comments

RiotFeralPonyMar 28, 20149 votes

We agree they aren't in a great spot though straight buffing any of these has it's own set of problems. I would imagine we'll see changes to these at some point but not in the short term. Our focus on itemization atm is primarily Support and Marksman itemization.

Sir ArmaMalumMar 28, 20142 votes

Thanks for stopping by to answer this question, I was wondering the same thing, at least particularly on Exec Calling and it's lack of late-game stat presence.

If I may ask what's your current opinion on Exec Calling? It seems like a downright necessary item when going against something like a high sustain lane and/or a Mundo, but it feels horrible to 'waste' a slot on as the game grinds on, at least imho. There's been some ideas thrown around about changing the stat to Attack Speed or something similar to get it out of the 'marksman only' mindset, does that idea have potential?

Always appreciate a rioter stopping by the forums, thanks again.

RiotFeralPonyMar 28, 201410 votes

GW isn't super effective against sustain lanes since you need to keep it applied at all times which makes it generally an ineffective counter. It is most powerful and useful against characters with high burst in-combat sustain like Swain and Mundo. I know the design team as a whole isn't entirely happy with how the mechanic is behaving and used.

It is the most relevant item of the list to be addressed sooner rather than later though as it has some overlap with Marksman/Carry itemization and those are more our focus atm. It does need some adjustments but it's almost more related to how we want to handle LS/Regen champs like Mundo, Swain, Warwick, etc rather than a problem directly tied to itemization.

I think EC feels more needed than it is actually effective, which is another problem, but generally I feel it's a bit weak and also ineffective at it's anti-sustain role.

Overall I rate it a :(

SinnerMagniusMar 28, 20141 votes

I know at one point one of the designers (I think it was Zenon) was toying with the idea of lowering sustain in general and removing grievous wounds, is this idea still being considered or a route you probably won't go down?

RiotFeralPonyMar 29, 20147 votes

I think is an approach something Zenon and several other designers feels passionate about (which is not surprising in Zenon's case as he's working on Warwick atm). I'm not personally in this camp but I also don't feel GW is a huge problem on live atm as some of them do. If this is an issue they want to tackle/address I certainly welcome it, I think there are a lot higher impact things I should be focusing on.

HellioningMar 30, 20144 votes

Grevious Wounds is bad for the game, honestly. Either sustain and healing is balanced around it being applied, in which case it's ridiculous when it isn't applied, or it's balanced around it not being applied, in which case it's useless when it is applied. It inversely effects some champions over others, and most of the champions it really hurts, like Sona and Soraka , are rather weak right now. Of course, it also screws over Nidalee and Renekton , so it's not all bad.

My main complains about bad items are that they seem very noobtrappy. You don't know how many Runaan's I've seen in Bronze V because it SEEMS to be a good item, though it really isn't in any practical situation.

RiotZenonTheStoicApr 8, 20145 votes

Yup, that thought indeed came out of the Warwick discussion. Basically, IMO there's roughly three use cases in which people might theoretically be considering grievous wounds (and I'm not sold that 3) is actually a thing)

High burst sustain self-heal champions. This is the likes of Mundo, Swain, Warwick, Volibear etc. There is usually a single, expensive (i.e. non-spammable) event where you want to apply GW: Mundo/Swain using ult, Warwick jumping in with ult and trying to spam Qs after (something he can't do constantly as Q is STUPID expensive on live), Volibear's passive proccing etc. I believe the reason people want GW in these situations is because the effects themselves may either be overtuned or feel like there's no counterplay once the champion gets ahead. Introducing a special item to "fix" this feels like a design crutch to me. It's taking away those champions' high moments.
Strong in-combat sustain healing. I don't know if this really is a thing anymore, but imagine having a support soraka, a top-lane nidalee and a mid kayle on the enemy team, and something like a jungle Xin who jumps into your team and starts being a man. In those cases it feels like you require GW to counter the enemy's setup, because the usual counterplay to Xin jumping into your team (burst him down) isn't available. Again, I don't think GW is the answer here. The problem is that there are strong offensive champions who get a big heal for free by itemizing in the most aggressive way possible (Nid, Kayle). As for support healing, whenever we push our supports away from in-combat healing, we make out-of-combat sustain ("top up" healing in between interactions) the stronger choice, and I think we generally find that to be the less healthy pattern (hence Soraka's armor buff on her heal, Taric's big CD chunk on basic attacks, Nami's bounce heal/hurt spell--all of these mechanics are meant to push the optimal use case of the spell to in combat rather than out of combat. I don't think they work, but the intention is there.)

IMO, if the enemy wants to build a team that enables a strong deep diver to live much longer than normally, they should be paying for it in some other way. If there is a legit setup with such tradeoffs that manages to get to the point where Xin can dive and wreak havoc, cool! Your entire enemy team coordinated to do a cool thing, they should get rewarded for it. I don't think it's fair to offset coordination through the pick phase, the laning phase and inside teamfights by simply buying one item and saying "hah! You're screwed now!"

End game ADC lifesteal sustain. So a lot of designers throw this one around as the reason for GW, but call me doubtful. End game ADCs, no matter what reddit and the forums say, are still absolutely insane in our game. There is no role that scales anywhere near as massively as dudes who right click you. They have access to more multiplicative stats than any other role (AD, AS, crit chance, crit dmg, procs, armor penetration) combined with the single most powerful innate tool in our game (range) and some of the sweetest deals in terms of itemization. The theory here is that if they mix in lifesteal in their build (which they can do easily enough; both BT and BotRK are great items even WITHOUT the LS on them) they can feel unkillable and as such, GW should give you a window to try and solo kill an ADC in the late game. I cannot argue with this intellectually; it makes perfect sense.

The problem is: I've never in my 1000+ games of League actually seen anyone use GW in such a way. I've never seen it on a stream, never seen it in a competitive game, I've not seen it in Silver II ranked, I've not seen it in normals--I'd love to be proven wrong here, but I don't think it's a thing!

So to back off and reassess the problem space at hand: sustain is a thing in our game, and in many cases it's totally fine to have. However, there's a handful of cases where sustain can feel so overwhelming that players want a "NOPE" button to turn off the enemy's sustain. That NOPE button should be GW.

PolaritieMar 28, 20144 votes

The one thing I'd be worrying about though is that currently sustain lanes aren't even being run bottom - it's all poke ( Annie Lulu ) or engage ( Leona Thresh ).

Of course, part of that is that the main sustain laners have been to see Morello a bit too much. Sona is horrifically squishy and Soraka gets by on the back of her poke ability.

Edit: Normally, the idea is that hard engage>sustain>poke>engage, but right now sustain is weak enough, and engage strong enough, that sustain champs really don't get played at all. Which is a shame, because I really enjoy Sona and her playstyle of everything-over-time.

RiotFeralPonyApr 4, 20145 votes

I agree with your core analysis but I think you're getting the wrong take-away from sustain power. It isn't that Sustain is too weak, it's the opposite there is simply too much sustain present that poke is ineffective due to such heavy amounts of inherent lifesteal. Additional sustain from champions like Sona and Soraka is simply excessive and mostly wasted in this scenario.

When sustain gets too powerful it forces opponents to rely on a 100-0 kill lane pattern as it's the only way to actually win lane and running additional sustain is largely a waste as all you need is enough sustain to mitigate or counteract poke.

That's part of the reason champs like Leona, Thresh, and Annie are so sought after atm. I'm fairly confident if there was less sustain in bot lane those champions would see a lot more play, even with no other changes.

YourtrueKamiApr 5, 20143 votes

I'm not sure if this is going to be accurate, I haven't played this game for a while now do to problems with download/patching, but from the sound of it this is what I gather. Sustain supports such as Soraka and Sona aren't satisfying to play but they can't be buffed because the value of lifesteal is too high right now. To me, is seems like the best thing to do, for sustain supports but maybe not the game, is to lower lifesteal and buff sustain from champions.

I'm not sure how well this could be balanced though. Just looking at what it would do now; it would give more need for sustain support (if not balanced properly it would make them required possibly) as it would lower the amount of health they get when fighting just from attacking and it would effect top lane. It seems like some lifesteal is becoming more common in top lane (either BotRK or Hydra).

Not sure how this would effect the game overall, but it would at least make sustain supports more satisfying and give them more of a reason to be chosen.

Blind TrooperMar 28, 20142 votes

To me, Exec Calling feels like a mid-tier niche item with a powerful enough passive that it was given the wonkiest of stats to keep it from being used. Low AD and 2nd highest crit item (After PD, tied with Shiv). The stats on it (while very efficient) are just not useful enough to want to buy an item when you can just use ignite (which 2-3 members always carry). I would like to see the item reworked into something similarto the Morellonomicon where it does have efficient, useful stats that someone wont feel awful about purchasing when it's needed.

WertilqMar 30, 20141 votes

EC have potential to be nasty bruiser item to shut down ADC even further. ADC rely heavily on life-steal late game, and if the item was good, bruisers/tanks might pick it up to stomp even harder on ADC.

DamadreasMar 30, 20141 votes

Most definitely, I being a player that has actually built EC recently -and- Atma's Impaler, I have to say this is exactly the role that those two items were effective for me. I was playing Garen top, snowballed pretty hard early, purchased the atmogs/exec combo with randuins sunfire boots as my other items as the enemy team was majorly AD. Frankly, with the crit on Garen's E the sheer amount of HP in the build in this situation, it wrecked, totally shutdown the enemy team.

CaptainWednesdayMar 31, 20142 votes

I can totally see Garen building those 2 items, since he has basic crits, Q crits, and E crits. However, who else could you use these items for? Gangplank... maybe?! They just are not healthy items right now.

WertilqApr 5, 20142 votes

Yep, except for ADC, very very few other champs actually get crit.

ModCaptainMårvelousMar 28, 20143 votes

Can I ask about item 3056 ? This item seemed to be "OMG SO OP BROKEN NASTY" when it was first teased but...well, it's just awkward. It's so expensive that by the time you get it, you could have built straight-tank and ignored towers and it's supposed to be an anti-turtle weapon but it doesn't really do that all that well either.

Have you guys ever thought of sticking Fortify on this or maybe some other tool to make this a bit more desirable?

RiotFeralPonyMar 29, 20145 votes

Yes, but again you need to look at the high level goals and problems in the game. We could certainly add a defensive option like fortify to item 3056 . However, when one of the most common high level complaints is that games are being stalled out and people have an inability to close out games adjusting this item seems to make this issue worse not better, which is why instead we chose to look at Boot Enchants patch since Homeguard seems like a likely culprit. It obviously isn't the only factor but if we adjust it we can see what else is at play.

If we had the opposite problem of people closing out games way too quickly, diving with impunity and breaking towers with ease I think looking at item 3056 would be high priority as it would offer a solution to a current problem. Atm the solution you propose would accomplish the goal of "Make this underused item more used and interesting" but it would fail at making the game better as a whole and could actually make it much worse. Though of course this landscape could easily change in future which could then make your approach incredibly valid.

It all depends on the current context of the game. While I agree with your goal, none of these decisions or priorities should be determined in vacuum, always try to keep external factors in mind.

daft inquisitorMar 29, 20141 votes

I don't see how buffing Ohmwrecker would make endgames take longer. I know most of my long-winded matches get stalled out when trying to take base turrets. If you buff Ohmwrecker to the point that people will want to use it, then you're going to see more people towerdiving with the Ohm and consequently blowing them up. If anything, I would think it would increase the pace of the endgame if more people have one.

RiotFeralPonyMar 30, 20143 votes

If you're only buffing the offensive use case - you're right, this would not contribute to longer games. The suggestion I was responding too was adding a Defensive Function to the item.

exec3Mar 29, 20146 votes

"diving with impunity and breaking towers with ease"

This is a confusing statement as in my experience this is exactly what is happening. My feelings on Ohmwrecker is that it's problematic because it's a solution in search of a problem. It's suppose to counter turrets for dives but towers are already weak (and have bad and buggy targeting AI) that it simply isn't needed. I see anyone with a little bit of tank be able to dive and take minimal damage and get the kill almost risk free, and this is early game, forget lategame where the tanky champs literally don't take damage.

If tower dives had more risk (even well planned dives need to have risk imo) then Ohmwrecker would naturally become a desirable item for dive comps.

Frankly i'd like to see a variant of Garrison be brought over to SR/TT to give people some response to tower dives other than try and kite around tower in the vain hope that the divers screw up somehow.

tl;dr

I feel like Ohmwrecker isn't the problem, towers are. Towers need more gameplay and interaction other than 'I built tank therefore I get to ignore towers'.

JingerbeardmanMar 28, 20143 votes

Thank you for responding :D, I agree that buffing any of these items right out would be a poor decision. What I am also curious about is why atmas impaler in particular has not been addressed at all in so long. I feel like if it had just 20 base damage added to it and a long sword added to its build components it would actually see quite a bit of use by the bruiser archetype. This would obviously need some kind of tradeoff which reducing the bonus attack damage based on health to 1%. This would make the item far more appealing as an early purchase as it would have double the AD compared to what you get now during the early game while still being close to equal the amount of damage you would get late game depending on the amount of health you get (at 3000 health you would only have an additional 5 ad compared to the bonus from 1.5% it has now, at 4000 health it would be equal). The cost would likely need to be raised an additional 200-300 gold though.

this is just some food for thought. You have also peeked my interest as to what sort of plans you have in store for marksman carries. I will be looking forward to seeing more in the future :)

RiotFeralPonyMar 29, 20144 votes

Atma's is not only a case of priorities but an issue of what problem(s) do we solve by "fixing" or reworking that item? In the case of Atma's if we buffed it to the point where it competes with other fighter itemization paths all we've done is substantially buffed the fighter class which is the dominate role atm. Some of the itemization adjustments this patch were designed to better equip the traditional counters to fighters - Heavy AP champs and Supports.

While the goal of make every underpurchased item better is a reasonable one, we don't want to have it fight against the larger goals and problems of the game currently.

BorandMar 29, 20143 votes

What if you increased combat effectiveness and lowered the GW power? 50% seems overboard and you'll have to straight up buff the regen/drain characters to compete with the GW, especially if late game their defensive power comes from their sustain.

50% will also skew the ad carry match-ups: Who-ever had the highest HP when the duel begins, has the upper hand.

If you really think it's necessary, I think the right way to go is to make it some sort of an active with lower power and give the item better stats.

RiotFeralPonyMar 29, 20145 votes

This is another approach some designers want to take, and I know it's a route some other games have gone down in the past. I think the GWs on Ignite it's commonplace enough the regen on those champs has already been buffed to the accommodate for GW. You would need to do the opposite and cut the regen of those champions if GW was reduced instead of buffing it.

In terms of Marksman v Marksman I'm not sure you'd get the result you want here either. If you are simply adding a more DPS for less regen you're still ultimately net neutral (if balanced appropriately of course), the way I think about that scenario is the following overly simplified formula.

Dmg (Player A) - Healing (Player B) vs Dmg (Player B) - Healing (PLayer A)

Trading GW for more Dmg would make the fight slightly more high dmg and faster overall but I'm not seeing a major change otherwise. Is there something I'm missing in your Carry vs Carry example?

BorandMar 29, 20141 votes

Hi!

I'll try and form a more detailed post this time, sorry if my post above isn't clear. First things first, I realize that this stat is a tricky one.
I am making points on the following two bases:
A: why this stat isn't accompanied by a strong item, and
B: what would would happen if a higher end item was built out of this items' current itteration.

Lengthy-ish post inc:

I think the GWs on Ignite it's commonplace enough the regen on those champs has already been buffed to the accommodate for GW.

Ignite is a spell that's up once every few minutes, and thus is OK to have a grievous wounds debuff with it. This is healthy, since between 2 ignites your opponent has a large time window to go aggressive on you, without the need of exceptional sustain. However, having this stat constantly up is not healthy for the game. An OK item with passive GW would be problematic since during trades or poke scenarios, at least one character will constantly be regenerating/self-restoring half the HP he should. In a way, one could say that the presence of the item in that lane lowers sustain by 50% for the opposing side. THIS would call for a raise in passive and active sustain in lane, which would then make a GW item a must buy.

How is this problem solved? There's more than one levers to adjust:

Duration of GW
Method of GW application
Power of GW
Slot efficiency of the item
Upgrade availability

Currently, the balance of the item has it gated/in check by utilizing #1, #4 and #5. The GW debuff is high power - low duration, and the item is not slot efficient. This way, it's not that the problem is non existant, but a dual approach is taken at the same time: A. Don't incentivize buying this item -> This item doesn't create balance issues and B. If the item is bought, both parties suffer from a significant stat loss.

If the method of application however differed, the power was lower, the item was stronger and the duration was slightly higher, the person buying the item wouldn't feel like a slot is being "placeholded". An idea about how an item with this stat could be balanced could be an item with strong stats and a toggle mode, where you should make a stat trade for the GW active (ex. trade 20% of your AS for the GW active). I think that 20% healing reduction is strong enough, doesn't feel bad to have and doesn't make the opponent feel overwhelmed.

In terms of Marksman v Marksman I'm not sure you'd get the result you want here either. If you are simply adding a more DPS for less regen you're still ultimately net neutral (if balanced appropriately of course), the way I think about that scenario is the following overly simplified formula.
Dmg (Player A) - Healing (Player B) vs Dmg (Player B) - Healing (PLayer A)

I hadn't thought about this this way.
The way I thought of it was that currently, you get to outplay your opponent or at least sustain back up after a trade by playing smart. Both parties require some smart play in order for a kill to happen. However, if this stat was (either) better (or) on a better item, the first party would hold a way stronger position once a trade was won, since he could constantly reduce the enemies sustain enough for the enemy to not have as much opportunity to sustain back up.

Overall, I think Executioners Calling should receive a minor rework, (I would take the direction I proposed, a designer could favor another one) with a strong upgrade later on. I believe it's good this way since the power of the GW stat could be in check for both mid game and late game, and a player could make actually make an itemization or counteritemization choice with some sort of trade off.

Edit: I wish you keep visiting this thread, it's nice when we players get to interact with you! believe that both parties benefit out of it plus it feels nice ^_^

RiotFeralPonyMar 30, 20145 votes

The situation with Ignite is that despite having a long cooldown it is pretty much always available when a large fight or multi-person fight occurs. This is partly why characters like Mundo and Swain are extremely durable in smallscale skirmishes but pretty much always have GW active when a teamfight erupts.

Where I think the miscommunicaiton occurred is you're viewing it from a laning/early mid-game perspective while I'm looking at it primarily from mid-late.

In terms of making EC a lane counter item we'd have to make it exceptionally cheap, and rushable which has a bunch of other side effect such as limiting what stats we can / should put on it. In addition, I'm not sure how often you would actually need to rush anti-regen counters in the current scene or even how useful it would be.

Not ruling anything out mind you, just trying to think through some o the side effects. As for the GW internal debate, I don't feel particularly passionate about it in either direction, I'd like the more invested designers try and figure out what direction they want to take the mechanic before I do any substantial item work.

JingerbeardmanMar 30, 20142 votes

Something that has crossed my mind multiple times with regard to EC is just getting rid of it and instead incorporating the GW effect into other items actives. In particular Yomus ghostblade, while it might seem like overkill it terms of what the active is capable of but its duration is what I am really looking at. Unlike many other actives, which would require odd additions to them for this to work effectively, Yomus provides the best outlet to grant a somewhat flexible way of applying GW similar to how morellonomicon works.

My other thought was combining Sword of the devine and executioners calling in some way. both items are somewhat odd in how they fit into a build, but if they were combined having grievous wounds only being applied while the active is up would create a very interesting interaction.

even more food for thought ;D

RiotFeralPonyMar 31, 20145 votes

That's certainly a valid option. EC's only real niche/identity lies in the GW passive. Should we decide to retain the mechanic it could very well be fused with another item.

JingerbeardmanMar 31, 20142 votes

just wanted to say thanks again for responding to our thoughts and questions Feralpony. It is really nice to have such a relaxed discussion and feel heard :)

MandaariMar 30, 20143 votes

Why not make a weaker, cheap version as a lane counter and have it build into something better lategame? You might even make 2 upgrade branches: one with relatively good stats but a weaker GW effect and one with relatively poor stats and a strong GW effect. Make the passive mutually exclusive.

RiotFeralPonyMar 31, 20145 votes

Would you ever actually purchase that as a lane counter? I'm having trouble envisioning the item that someone would actually buy as a counter to an overbearing sustain lane. Historically the best solution has been either buy it no matter (S1 era EC) or just counter with your own sustain via lifesteal.

MandaariMar 31, 20142 votes

I'd have to try out different iterations of the item ofc, but you raise a good point. I think I would buy the item if lifesteal weren't already such a good counter that is in my core build path. That and sustain supports can be countered by a quick sustain item. So I think the problem is twofold: Sustain supports need to outscale a vamp scepter and there needs to be an item to counter the new, stronger sustain.

BorandMar 31, 20142 votes

Thanks for taking your time to reply. I certainly see your points and have nothing more to add on EC as an item and GW as a stat in general and specifically.

I don't wanna push my/our luck here, and understand that some information might not be disclosable, but I am genuinely curiousabout and interested in the following. Ofcourse I expect that if you let us know, you let us know only as much as you judge necessary/healthy to say. So, what I'd like to ask are...

A. Whether the rest of the classes are slotted for having more class-focused itemization and/or QoL passes like the currently tested AP Mid/AP Support itemization,
B. Whether junglers will keep receiving better itemization and access to gold (they end up around 3d-5th in terms of gold gains in the majority of my games) and
C. Whether items like Runaans, Zephyr, Zekes, etc will see any kind of functionality/survivability or stat retrofitting passes.

My questions stem from (feel (?)) problems that mid- and end- game itemization suffers, as well as items with extremely strong trade-offs that overall might end up causing miss-optimization when built.
(Ex: What's the home class for Zekes? Supports don't really need the lifesteal and 250 HP doesn't trace well into the late game for junglers and top laners.
Ex 2: The tenacity on Zephyr forces you into non-mercs boots and non-golem spirit items which lowers survivability
Ex 3: Runaans has the highest Attack Speed in game but feels weird and doesn't boost survivability or damage esp. when compared to as zeal upgrade)

GG CronoApr 1, 20142 votes

Seconding a potential comment on Zeke's. I've always liked the item conceptually, but it just doesn't deliver. Some kind of "offensive aura" item would be an interesting niche, but this is a niche that just isn't filled well at the moment.

Would the idea of turning it back into an attack speed aura item ever be considered? Not as strong as it was before, obviously, because that could be kind of bonkers. But it could be an interesting choice for enabling heavy push-based strategies.

RiotFeralPonyApr 6, 20143 votes

I'm curious what about the item conceptually attracted you? Was it just "offensive aura" or was there more to it?

Might have to open up a new thread at this point. Most of these reply spaces are capped out.

Curse you folks for helpful and insightful comments!

RiotFeralPonyApr 4, 20144 votes

A- Yes, though that style of item cleanup that we saw last patch (cost tuning, recipe cleanup etc) is more of a passion project of mine as it bothers me quite a bit from a kind of designer OCD standpoint. Some of it was also necessary and important groundwork for future expansion of the item system and to get the itemization system as a whole in a better spot.

When we do this style of batch change for each grouping of items is going to vary a bit, the next largescale pass on recipe cleanup/adjustments will probably be Marksman items, followed by Fighter/Tank, followed by Mages, though some stuff will probably occur out of order when it's appropriate.

Example - Attack Speed itemization is primarily a Marksman stat but in adjusting those recipes we're already looking at Wit's End for example so despite it being more of a Fighter Item it makes a lot of sense to tackle at the same time.

Another aspect of this is to shift items more into their unique roles having clearly defined strengths and weaknesses. The Aegis/Locket changes were an example of this for last patch. We striped the armor focusing it more into an anti-magic damage role instead of a mediocre feeling just all around good item.

B- Jungle itemization is a hot topic with the team right now, it's not something I am personally working on atm so I can't actually speak to it much. At this very moment I'm focusing more on Attack Speed items.

C- Some of those items will certainly be updated when it is appropriate. Hurricane, Zephyr, Rageblade, and Wit's End for example are all on our radar atm for changes since it makes sense as we're touching AS itemization as a whole. Not saying we'll ultimately go through with everything but if we hit a spot we're happy with them we will absolutely update them. As general practice I would much prefer updating and improving an existing item when we can rather than creating a new one for a variety of reasons.

Zeke's, not really being related to the larger categories we're looking at atm, is not on our radar for the next pass, though it's something I would love to look at in the future still.

exec3Apr 4, 20142 votes

When you say Marksman items are up next followed by tank/fighter items do you mean for these smaller scale item build changes? Because I thought that support was up next for improved itemization with this patch being just a small cleanup in preparation for the bigger changes.

MakersFMar 31, 20141 votes

I saw the changes suggested for the patch 4.5. Many AP item got buffed, but at the moment I feel a lack of option for the AP support who wants to go tanky but not full tank. Seeker's Armguard is an example of a really nice item for this kind of path, but it misses a tankier upgrade and a support with zhonya active is kinda against it's role (helping others for the team more than protecting himself). As you said your focus is on marksman/support, are there any plans regarding this aspect?

RiotFeralPonyApr 1, 20142 votes

Totally agree Armguard's missing something else. We had plans for adjusting it slightly but we didn't have the item(s) for it to build into so it didn't feel worth adjusting. I'm sure we'll revisit it, especially if we have a good support item or two for it to build into. That will require some small adjustments to the armguard itself though as CS isn't a good trigger for those champs to stack the item.

Tobasco da GamaMar 29, 20142 votes

I'm curious if there are any plans for item 3091 . It's always been a really good item with a strange build path: item 1043 is kind of always a crappy item to pick up, at every stage of the game, so you tend to buy a item 1033 and item 1042 , then sit on them while buying other stuff until you have the 1600g for the upgrade.

Personally, I'd like to see one of two things happen with item 3091 .

Replace with a second and with . Lower the final item's AS and increase its MR.
Replace with a new mid-tier item that combines AS with another stat or passive effect, something analogous to Aether Wisp or Forbidden Idol.

@FeralPony: Are you guys currently looking at Wit's End at all?

Newbert NewmanMar 29, 20142 votes

I actually can agree with this one; might be wierd adding a mid-teir attack speed item built out of something but it would even be useful on BOTRK.

Tobasco da GamaMar 30, 20141 votes

Yeah. Have it give a little AS and a little on-hit damage (something pretty negligible, ~10-15 or so?). That would make sense as a component of both BoRK and Wit's End.

RiotFeralPonyApr 6, 20142 votes

There is a bit of weirdness with the damage type shifting (magic to physical on the upgrade) if it built into BotRK, but yeah it's definitely on the table.

Samflash3Apr 6, 20143 votes

Well, Bilgewater's active changes from magic to physical when built to BorK.

Random question: Is there going to be any on-hit sustain item added? FF is a great item though but it's more for junglers. Lifesteal seems like the only sustain mechanic item but yet it relies heavily on your Attack Damage for sustain. Something like a flat healing that scales with level or maybe even Wits End with a 5 health per hit sustain added.

RiotFeralPonyApr 6, 20144 votes

I wouldn't add it to Wit's End but yes lifesteal on hit is a solid mechanic. It's worked out well on item 1055 and I can see us using it again.

RiotFeralPonyApr 6, 20142 votes

Valid point on the dmg change from BC to BotRK. If we were to add a flat mgc damage component piece you'd be looking at a bunch function changes between the component items and the finished item.

Proc Dmg:

Flat -> Percent

Magic -> Physical

Active Dmg:

Flat -> Percent

Magic -> Physical

On some level that's a lot of differences that get very mathy ex- Do you need a calculator and/or spreadsheets to know which is better? That much functionality change is also a bit weird, but on the other hand when written out like above it's more elegant that I was expecting as it does follow the active pattern nicely. I'll give it some more thought. I'm glad you guys are questioning me on this stuff :)

exec3Apr 6, 20142 votes

What if Bilgewater and the new on-hit item did physical damage and transformed to magic damage when specifically upgrading to the mage centered item? Basically the same damage type progression as Sheen.

TactApr 6, 20143 votes

FeralPony, if you think it's weird to change the damage type like that, why haven't Sheen items made it into the discussion? The Sheen proc changes to magic damage for Lich Bane and stays as physical damage for everything else. Granted, Sheen and its upgrades are more popular items, but I'm not sure why you would call it weird with this hypothetical new item when Sheen exists and does this very thing.

RiotFeralPonyApr 6, 20142 votes

It's is certainly a bit weird on Sheen, and has been discussed. As with everything you need to take it on a case by case basis. Not saying it couldn't happen or we wouldn't do it, but generally it's a good principle to avoid weirdness unless you're gaining a lot from that decision. In BotRK's case it might be easy to clean up the recipe without it, and if so I'd like to avoid it but using a mgc damage proc item that turns into botrk switching damage types and conditions (flat -> % Hp) ultimately might be the most elegant solution. Not something I've put much thought space into yet.

JingerbeardmanApr 6, 20142 votes

just to let ya know FP I opened a new thread so that we can continue the discussion on certain topics