@Riot: Are you sure you're not lying about "not wanting to set the meta"

ShinRaigeki·7/17/2014, 5:05:35 AM·4 votes·601 views

Let's just summarize a few examples:

-Lulu was popular in all lanes, but especially "Toxic" in top lane, completely ruining the bruiser top meta. Proceed to nerf Lulu. -Soraka was popular top-lane as an alternative AS WELL AS as a support AND mid. She was harassive but she did not flat out dominate any lane (especially top, where she was about as effective as Renekton!) -Both of the above are cases of Riot promoting the Toplane as a must-bruiser meta. --Not entirely sure, but could the ADC changes be an attempt to tone them out of the top-lane meta too?

-Riven saw quite a bit of use in mid lane, proceed to nerf her HP Regen.

-Annie saw use in bottom lane over mid, proceed to nerf and readjust her skills.

It seems like whenever a champ finds a use outside what's expected, the answer is "nerf it". In fact you noted the next champ's meant to be a top laner - should we expect it nerfed when/if it goes jungle, mid, or sup!?

10 Comments

MrSc0tty7/17/2014, 11:41:20 AM2 votes

It's a case of somewhat irritating double standards. If, say, Renekton and melee bruisers with strong kill potential early force out oh, let's say every tank in the game from toplane-then that's the natural Metagame. But if a "support" goes and competes ANYWHERE (lulu mid, Soraka top, Alistar jungle, Janna ADC ) then it immediately gets targeted nerfs to "bring it in line ".

Then, because every support is too undertuned to work anywhere else, any time something goes botlane that beats them, it gets the bat (Fidds Zyra Annie)

The other class with "the protection of Riot" is the precious AD carry. Anything that creates a game where there is a successful comp without an AD carry, or anything that counters ad carries well enough to reliably kill them gets a heavy nerf.

Lneacx7/17/2014, 9:04:38 AM1 votes

Lulu Soraka Annie are examples of champions being too powerful in alternate roles. Specifically Lulu/Soraka were forcing lane opponents out of viability, and Annie did the same to other supports.

Riven was just too powerful. Her HP Regen was compensated by a E buff, so if anything she'll work as well as she did before. Riven just hasn't been picked mid because other melee mids (which she was and is used as a counter for) haven't been picked either. Not sure if she's used against much else.

InsaneSamurai7/18/2014, 6:31:59 PM1 votes

I think they are failing to realize that one of the best things about this game is it's malleability. The fact that so many champs are not forced into one specific role is a great thing, and doing things like this only gradually makes the game have less and less options. It's hard to say what they are thinking with stuff like this, as they do tend to go against what they say somewhat often. The Design Values blog said "Instead of offering a best path forward, we want to offer different paths forward that have real tradeoffs. Players should see changes that reflect this philosophy when we introduce strategic tradeoffs for emergent strategies, not because they're new and unique, but usually because they're dominating the scene.". So, if this is true, why keep shoehorning champs into one role? The blog also says: "Whether a player wants an assassin that waits for the perfect engage or a tank that fights when he pleases, we want to present a wide selection of champions that can deliver on a variety of distinct roles." Did they just mean a variety of roles, but only one per champion? I feel like that blog is making less and less sense over time, because if these were really the things they see as the most important, they wouldn't go against them so often.

Another great example is the design value "A fight loses its excitement if the first punch wins – it's what you can do after that adds depth and complexity.". If that were true, then Blitz/Thresh grabs shouldn't end fights the vast majority of the time they land, and I think someone like Fizz blows that sentence away as soon as he gets ahead.