Why does Annie's stun have counterplay to it, but Veigar's doesn't?
People keep bringing up visability. Veigar's stun was easy to see. If he hadn't used it recently, it was off CD. Very simple lol. He also ran at you to use it, the only time Veigar would be running at you. Annie can at least hide her stun by sitting on 3 spells and spamming 2 quickly.
Duke Anax1 votesAnnies stun is a combo, needs to charged and can be discharged on the wrong spell. it's not much, but at least it needs more effort than old veigar.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesI mean, she typically charges the stun in base lol. So by the time she reaches lane, it is just sitting there. I'm not sure what you mean by combo though? Unless you mean it's a combo because it needs to be charged, which I would disagree with lol.
My question more so focused on: what is there difference between Annie throwing a Tibber's stun on you compared to Veigar. I feel like you had much more counterplay to old Veigar since you could at least dodge the walls or stay in the cage. It feels like the only counterplay to Annie's stun is "don't go anywhere near her while she free farms".
Jubbinaut1 votesAnnie's stun has more visibility before it appears (when her passive is up, she laughs and the spiral vfx appears at her feet). Annie's stun has a shorter effective range. Annie's stun requires resources beyond the triggering cost.
Meanwhile, Veigar's stun - on its 14-sec cooldown - was objectively better than some ults in the game.
Additionally, you're (again) comparing a passive to an active. It's a pretty difficult comparison to make rationally.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesI was able to dodge Veigar's stun. I cannot do the same with Annie.
I mean, Veigar's stun was extremely visable. He didn't use it recently lol.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2015-02-26T23:06:43.505+0000)
I was able to dodge Veigar's stun. I cannot do the same with Annie.
Funny, I don't seem to have much problem with it - from either end. I find that I can avoid her stun when she's casting it at me (except when she uses Q, and here we get into the whole "difficult comparison" thing again). I also find that others can avoid my stun when I'm playing as her. Not easily necessarily, but it's certainly possible.
I mean, Veigar's stun was extremely visable. He didn't use it recently lol.
Technically, that's not visibility, it's game knowledge. There's no "read" on whether or not his stun is available to him, whereas Annie has a distinctly noticeable visual effect related to the readiness of her stun.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesFunny, I don't seem to have much problem with it - from either end. I find that I can avoid her stun when she's casting it at me (except when she uses Q, and here we get into the whole "difficult comparison" thing again). I also find that others can avoid my stun when I'm playing as her. Not easily necessarily, but it's certainly possible.
You can avoid an instant stun Tibbers? That is some skill. Not too mention that yes, her point and click can stun.
Technically, that's not visibility, it's game knowledge. There's no "read" on whether or not his stun is available to him, whereas Annie has a distinctly noticeable visual effect related to the readiness of her stun.
Again, this effect is easily hidden with the 3 spell thing that most people do, unless of course they are trying to zone you since if you go near her with her stun up you are dead.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-26T23:27:11.744+0000)
You can avoid an instant stun Tibbers? That is some skill. Not too mention that yes, her point and click can stun.
I've done it multiple times. I've had plenty of people dodge my Tibbers. It's the same kind of prediction used to avoid any other kind of skill-shot.
Yes, her Q can trigger stun. On one target. With a slow travel time. And only if you wait to be sure it hits before you try to drop another spell. So while the stun itself connects, it's easy to ensure that nothing else does.
Again, this effect is easily hidden with the 3 spell thing that most people do, unless of course they are trying to zone you since if you go near her with her stun up you are dead.
So, a skilled Annie can manipulate the counter-play aspect, allowing both her and her opponent to make tactical play decisions? That sounds a lot like Riot's actual goal - improve tactical play and counterplay.
Counterplaying counterplay is still counterplay.
Do me a favor, though, will you? Maybe, if you're going to argue about something, you should actually establish what you're arguing for. Are you saying Veigar shouldn't have been changed, or are you saying Annie should be? (Wow, isn't that familiar?)
Nucleophilic atk1 votesDo me a favor, though, will you? Maybe, if you're going to argue about something, you should actually establish what you're arguing for. Are you saying Veigar shouldn't have been changed, or are you saying Annie should be? (Wow, isn't that familiar?)
What? I defined the thread topic already. Who said I was arguing either of these points? Simply asking why one skill shot with the possibility to stun has 0 counterplay while another skill shot stun (or even point and click) has layers of it. If you don't want to carry on a friendly conversation, you don't have to comment on the thread.
Jubbinaut1 votesYou're misunderstanding me. Your arguments are obviously coming from a specific position, but you're refusing to make that position clear. As such, I'll adjust my answer to fit only the question posed by the thread topic.
The difference between Annie's stun and Veigar's stun is this:
Annie's stun is a passive ability, which must be triggered by other effects besides itself.
Veigar's stun is an active ability requiring no additional effects to trigger its usage.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesOk, so what makes one skill shot with the potential to stun have 0 counterplay and another skill shot/point and click stun have layers of counterplay?
I get the "charge" aspect, but her having to use spells first doesn't exactly yell counterplay to it in my opinion. I mean, in order for a Nasus Q to kill you, he has to use other spells first. It's not like Annie's charge is like Braum's.
Jubbinaut1 votesAgain I'll ask: What are you getting at? You asked what the difference was, but when presented with differences, you attempt to shift the discussion on to a single specific point.
So what are you trying to show, here?
Nucleophilic atk1 votesElaborate on that point a little please. You presented differences, and I asked how that meant Veigar had no counterplay but Annie did. You have surely mentioned differences, but not differences that show Veigar's stun having 0 counter, or frankly any less, than Annie's stun.
You answered with: Annie's stun is a passive ability, which must be triggered by other effects besides itself.
Veigar's stun is an active ability requiring no additional effects to trigger its usage.
I'm not sure how this means that Veigar has 0 counterplay and Annie is layered with it.
Jubbinaut1 votesYou're attempting to force me into a position, here. Specifically, you're attempting to force me into stating that Veigar has no counterplay, but that Annie does. That specific answer was not intended to speak towards counterplay regarding either. As I also said before that answer:
I'll adjust my answer to fit only the question posed by the thread topic.
As a reminder, your thread topic is:
Can someone explain the difference between Annie's stun and Veigar's?
So let me try one last time:
You are obviously arguing some point. You are, however, actively avoiding establishing what that point is. It's effectively impossible to have a meaningful discussion when you're refusing to establish your side of it.
As such, if you aren't going to establish it, I'm going to stand explicitly by those answers. After all, what's the point in talking about any further distinctions or what those distinctions mean when you're just going to move the goalposts some more.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesYou seem to be highly misunderstanding something. I am not forcing you into anything. Riot said that it had no counterplay, so I'm asking community why. If you don't know, then you probably shouldn't be on the thread. Yes, the title says, "explain the difference" and then the post describes what difference I want explained, ie why one has no counterplay and the other does. I'm not sure what you are not understanding here to be honest.
Me asking for why Veigar's stun has 0 counterplay and Annie's does is NOT me "obviously arguing some point". You are making wild and crazy assumptions. I will say that either you have trouble with someone countering your points, or you don't understand the thread. Either way, I am done doing circles with you.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=000100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-27T12:20:55.845+0000)
You seem to be highly misunderstanding something. I am not forcing you into anything. Riot said that it had no counterplay, so I'm asking community why. If you don't know, then you probably shouldn't be on the thread.
I've answered with differences that related to counterplay. Rather than countering my points, you merely told me I was wrong.
Without establishing a point of your own.
Like I said, it's effectively impossible to have a meaningful discussion like that.
I'm not sure what you are not understanding here to be honest.
What I don't understand is why you're trying so hard to pretend like you don't have some kind of point/agenda in this, when the entire discussion would be infinitely easier if you'd own up to it.
Me asking for why Veigar's stun has 0 counterplay and Annie's does is NOT me "obviously arguing some point".
You flatly disagreeing with anything that doesn't fit your assumption is you obviously arguing some point. I'm not merely referring to your OP when I say that, but to your repeated responses, which all boil down to simply telling people they're wrong.
With no explanation, no counter-points, nothing meaningful. It's a pointless discussion. It's a waste of everyone's time, because there's nothing to gain from this.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesI've answered with differences that related to counterplay. Rather than countering my points, you merely told me I was wrong.
Your first post said that the difference was Annie's is visable and Veigar's isn't. If this was the means for it having no counterplay, then every single stun that doesn't have a circle around the champ when up, would be nerfed.
What I don't understand is why you're trying so hard to pretend like you don't have some kind of point/agenda in this, when the entire discussion would be infinitely easier if you'd own up to it.
You flatly disagreeing with anything that doesn't fit your assumption is you obviously arguing some point. I'm not merely referring to your OP when I say that, but to your repeated responses, which all boil down to simply telling people they're wrong.
As above. Me saying something about your comment does not mean I flatly disagree with everything everyone says.
Your inability to answer the question does not make my post flawed, it just means that maybe you shouldn't comment on it.
Jubbinaut1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-27T19:29:28.952+0000)
Your first post said that the difference was Annie's is visable and Veigar's isn't. If this was the means for it having no counterplay, then every single stun that doesn't have a circle around the champ when up, would be nerfed.
My first post said a lot of things. That's one of them. Here's the rest (along with an extra for shits and giggles):
What you're doing now is shoehorning me into some argument that, frankly, I'm not making. And the stupidest part is, I don't even understand what argument you're trying to shoehorn me into, because despite repeatedly asking you what you hope to demonstrate here, you refuse to answer.
It seems like you're trying to indicate that I'm arguing that Veigar's stun had no counterplay. Which I'm not. And frankly, I haven't seen Riot make that statement, either. Low counterplay and no counterplay aren't the same thing.
As above. Me saying something about your comment does not mean I flatly disagree with everything everyone says.
Except that, unsurprisingly, I've been reading the thread. And you've flatly disagreed with every single person who actually offered meaningful differences between the two - except for those times where you chose to move the goalposts.
Your inability to answer the question does not make my post flawed, it just means that maybe you shouldn't comment on it.
Your inability to actually respond to others' posts in anything resembling a rational manner makes your post flawed. I have nothing to do with it.
Truly Prideful1 votesTheir argument would be that her stun has visibility to it. I don't have an issue with her stun or Veigar's old stun. They just need to drop the .5 second cast time from his stun to make it possible to land against someone with a pulse. I think that would still satisfy their 'counterplay' thing.
Nucleophilic atk3 votesI mean, I could see that. But you knew that Veigar had his stun up if he didn't use it very recently. So I am not sure how Annie's is more visable. In fact, Annie could just sit at 3 spells and quickly spam 2 so that you can't see it anyway.
Truly Prideful1 votesIt depends on how you're looking at her. If we're looking at her in the same context as Veigar in mid, then you can force her to waste her stun by pushing her into her turret. As a support, yeah she can sit on it but there are things that can deal with her. I can see what you're saying and I don't think they should have touched Veigar, but it is easy to feel out where her stun is even if she plays the 3 charge game. For Veigar it was more about just understanding he had about 14 seconds between stuns.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesVeigar also only used his stun when he was going to either initiate or defend a gank. LIke, it was really obvious. He didn't use it every 14 seconds or he had 0 mana. Not too mention that his stun didn't even do anything except stop you at early levels, since W wouldn't even hit by the time the stun was up. Just a really stupid change and I don't even play the dude that much.
Truly Prideful1 votesThat is the main difference between Veigar and Annie's stuns. You can make Annie use her stun by pushing her into her turret and having a fat bruiser jump on her first since you know it's up and her next spell will waste it. Veigar gets to hold his stun and use it on his terms. I'm just trying to help explain their thought process, but I do agree that his change was stupid.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesTheir logic makes no sense. Have a bruiser jump on her? How is that different from Veigar? Is Veigar not going to use his stun if he gets jumped on? I mean, I know he is tankier than Annie and everything.....not lol.
Stephenizgod1 votesThere is not much difference between the two stuns, but admittedly Annie's is slightly more noticeable then Veigar's although there is still just as little counterplay to it.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesYa know, I would even go as far to say that Veigar's was more obvious. I mean, how many times did Veigar run to you if his stun wasn't up lol? Knowing that he hasn't used it recently tells you that it is up.
Stephenizgod1 votesYea but he could be bluffing if it was on CD or not, Annie it was obvious whether she had it up or not.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesHow so? Annie could clearly bluff her stun by simply walking to you with her stun up. If you stay in range, you dead. If you run, you miss farm.
Stephenizgod1 votesWhat i mean is you cant really tell when Veigar's stun is up, with Annie you know that at anytime she can stun you because you can see the swirly thing.
Cindikle1 votesHolding her stun prevents her from farming with abilities(if you push the lane). Or as support from harassing with abilities if she doesn't want to use the stun. She also has to charge hers. It also requires her to land a damage ability.
Veigar's old stun had no warning he was going to use it. It was followed up by damage if it landed. He doesn't have to use it till he wants to.
Overall different champions though.
Annie is closer to Viktor Veigar's closer to Syndra
Nucleophilic atk1 votesIf you push the lane, she isn't going to hold stun, though, she is going to kill you with it lol.
But taking your point into consideration, why does Annie's have counterplay to it but Veigar's didn't?
Cindikle1 votesBecause you can prepare for it easier.
Veigar is also much more likely to intagib you.
Annie's ability to stun in an AoE is only really threatening on her ulti. While Veigar can do it every 10-12 seconds(after a few ranks). Otherwise her Q has a travel time, allowing you to move to a safer position. W can work for an AoE stun but it puts her at a lot more risk.
Viegar's has quite a bit of range for it's max(even more now). And you would get no warning other than you should always expect it.
Not saying it's in a good spot now. It really needs the cast time removed. But it probably was the strongest stun in the game with the least counterplay. And wasn't an ulti to top it off.
This is more or less why I say he's closer to Syndra. Both have a hard to avoid long range stun. Syndra though requires two spells and it can be avoided by lucky side-stepping. Especially now that they hit the width. (Also, Q harass, Targeted AoE with a delay and ulti that does a lot of damage.)
Nucleophilic atk1 votesSee, I never had a problem with it really. That is how I am confused on how it had no counterplay. I mean, early game, it did absolutely nothing. It didn't even stun you long enough for the thingy to drop on you. You can also just avoid his stun all together since it is a skill shot and the stun portion is a pretty thin line. You can totally chose to just stay inside the cage. There was plenty of counterplay to Veigar, hence why saw such low play when you can pick champs like Zed that have 0 weaknesses.
Cindikle1 votesYes his early game is weak. But later in the game, that stun could end your team before they can react. As shown when he's played as support.
Nucleophilic atk1 votes
Zed is allowed to be strong cuz "meh buy zonyas"
Eleshakai1 votesAnnie's stun is around 600 range unless she blows flash and is single target unless she's using a fairly long cooldown. Veigar's is over 1000 and has a ~14 second cooldown and if he lands it he'll burst you instantly.
Also Veigar's stun used to be JUST as point and click as Annie's. It's a skillshot now, but it used to be point and click - just not targeted point and click.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesAlso Veigar's stun used to be JUST as point and click as Annie's. It's a skillshot now, but it used to be point and click - just not targeted point and click.
Uhm, by that logic, just about everything in the game is point and click. Also, yes the range is different. How does that mean that Veigar's stun had no counterplay and Annie's has a plethora of it?
Eleshakai1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2015-02-27T12:22:38.458+0000)
Uhm, by that logic, just about everything in the game is point and click. Also, yes the range is different. How does that mean that Veigar's stun had no counterplay and Annie's has a plethora of it?
Range makes a huge difference for counterplay. Annie has to work around her flash because of how low the range is. That means the counterplay is - while her ability to do a flash engage is on cooldown, make plays(also you can force her to waste it on a heavy tank line who is running interference - which is another form fo counterplay). That's a HUGE window. You have three to five minutes to make plays around it. Veigar - you have 14 seconds. That's not a long time to counterplay it.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesOk, I see your point here. I will say, though, she doesn't have to work around her flash if playing against one of the many champs that are melee.
Eleshakai1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-27T19:31:10.351+0000)
Ok, I see your point here. I will say, though, she doesn't have to work around her flash if playing against one of the many champs that are melee.
But the melee people usually aren't the ones annie WANTS to stun. It's usually the squishy ad/ap carries that she wants to stun... so the actual PROBLEM case of Annie's stun usually requires stun unless the enemy just factually sets up in a superior place... both strategic outplay AND flash are suitable costs for that powerful of a disable skill. A 14 second cooldown isn't.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesThere are plenty of melee assassins. There are also plenty of counters to Veigar's stun. Tenacity makes it so that you don't even get stunned long enough for his W to hit you, cleanse, quicksilver, dodging the thin walls. You can also easily outplay Veigar. Hence the reason he was never picked lol.
Eleshakai1 votes[{quoted}](name=Nucleophilic atk,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=1JmbNxet,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2015-02-27T12:22:38.458+0000)
Uhm, by that logic, just about everything in the game is point and click. Also, yes the range is different. How does that mean that Veigar's stun had no counterplay and Annie's has a plethora of it?
Here's my definition of a skillshot:
Any ability that, after you cast it, an opponent has the opportunity to react to and are able to avoid if they react appropriately.
I don't consider Tibbers to be a s killshot either btw.
Nucleophilic atk1 votesOk, so after Veigar casts his stun, you have opportunity to react and avoid as well.