What's your opinion on towers right now

Rozair··11 votes·17,326 views

I would love to know what riot thinks

147 Comments

Incognonymous11 votes

They have poor, unreliable targeting and they're too weak to matter at anything but the lowest levels.

RiotRiot Koalifier9 votes

Caveat: I don't design anything at all, I just like playing League of Legends.

Turret targeting is something that might be a point of improvement, but what would that look like? Clearly turrets should not prioritize champions, or pushing lanes becomes extremely difficult. I'm not a fan of the %hp idea, because it makes tanks less relevant, and they already struggle as a class with shifts in the meta.

What are some examples of how turret aggro should work better? Here's my assumptions:

  • The tower shouldn't switch targets if it's already hitting a champ.
  • The tower should prioritize champions only when there are no minions/pets, and only when they deal damage to friendly champions.
  • Tower aggro rules should be easy to understand and consistent. (e.g. doing damage to an enemy vs. hitting an enemy with non-damaging cc - either damage should trigger aggro, or any ability/damage should trigger aggro. Imo we should maintain the current functionality).
  • Tower attack rate should be consistent (no tower autoattack reset on champ aggro).
  • Towers shouldn't "cheat" against champion abilities (i.e. they shouldn't deal damage through item 3157, shouldn't ignore Fizz untargetability.

Under that set of assumptions, the improvements to tower AI that would make sense in my mind would be: _A. Towers do not drop aggro when champions become untargetable. _

This could help to prevent certain champions from being really high-tier tower divers. They don't continue dealing damage, but Elise rappel would need to take her out of tower range to prevent her from taking further damage after she lands.

The problem with this would be that it allows extended tower dives in a different way: Fizz aggros enemy champ under tower with no minions, Elise joins him. Fizz is taking tower damage, so he uses E to survive while Elise continues dealing damage. Because tower aggro stays on him through untargetability now, Elise does not take tower damage or aggro. Once Fizz lands, he has time to Q before using item 3157 to dodge the next shot, and he still has tower aggro so Elise still takes no damage. Finally, Fizz flashes out of tower range as Elise finishes the kill, never having taken damage from the turret. The end result is 2-4 less tower shots fired at enemy champs during the dive than before, and Fizz gets to dive a tower for about 6 seconds and only take 2 tower shots at most, depending on how good his timing is. Personally, I think this would just exacerbate the problem.

B. Towers aggro enemy champions that are in their attack range when a friendly champion is attacked from outside their range.

This could actually be pretty helpful to prevent those weird scenarios where the friendly champ is far enough out of range that the tower keeps hitting minions, but I don't know how much it would do to prevent tower dives.

While I think #B could be a good improvement, I don't think it will do what a lot of you want, which is to make towers super threatening.

Towers should be something that inhibit diving and create a fallback for the defending team, but they should not be so powerful that a team cannot choose to take the risk of tower aggro to secure an objective/kill. I don't think we could bump up their damage without having a negative impact in that regard.

Flemman2 votes

Actually, SR tower for nexus/inhib should be replaced with 3v3 nexus/inhib tower, it that map they feel powerfull enough to be a threat without being unkillable with proper teamplay

xReadyPlayerOnex4 votes

[{quoted}](name=Riot Koalifier,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=yVtNgptt,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2016-01-08T19:43:32.393+0000)

Caveat: I don't design anything at all, I just like playing League of Legends.

Turret targeting is something that might be a point of improvement, but what would that look like? Clearly turrets should not prioritize champions, or pushing lanes becomes extremely difficult. I'm not a fan of the %hp idea, because it makes tanks less relevant, and they already struggle as a class with shifts in the meta.

What are some examples of how turret aggro should work better? Here's my assumptions:

  • The tower shouldn't switch targets if it's already hitting a champ.
  • The tower should prioritize champions only when there are no minions/pets, and only when they deal damage to friendly champions.
  • Tower aggro rules should be easy to understand and consistent. (e.g. doing damage to an enemy vs. hitting an enemy with non-damaging cc - either damage should trigger aggro, or any ability/damage should trigger aggro. Imo we should maintain the current functionality).
  • Tower attack rate should be consistent (no tower autoattack reset on champ aggro).
  • Towers shouldn't "cheat" against champion abilities (i.e. they shouldn't deal damage through item 3157, shouldn't ignore Fizz untargetability.

Under that set of assumptions, the improvements to tower AI that would make sense in my mind would be: _A. Towers do not drop aggro when champions become untargetable. _

This could help to prevent certain champions from being really high-tier tower divers. They don't continue dealing damage, but Elise rappel would need to take her out of tower range to prevent her from taking further damage after she lands.

The problem with this would be that it allows extended tower dives in a different way: Fizz aggros enemy champ under tower with no minions, Elise joins him. Fizz is taking tower damage, so he uses E to survive while Elise continues dealing damage. Because tower aggro stays on him through untargetability now, Elise does not take tower damage or aggro. Once Fizz lands, he has time to Q before using item 3157 to dodge the next shot, and he still has tower aggro so Elise still takes no damage. Finally, Fizz flashes out of tower range as Elise finishes the kill, never having taken damage from the turret. The end result is 2-4 less tower shots fired at enemy champs during the dive than before, and Fizz gets to dive a tower for about 6 seconds and only take 2 tower shots at most, depending on how good his timing is. Personally, I think this would just exacerbate the problem.

B. Towers aggro enemy champions that are in their attack range when a friendly champion is attacked from outside their range.

This could actually be pretty helpful to prevent those weird scenarios where the friendly champ is far enough out of range that the tower keeps hitting minions, but I don't know how much it would do to prevent tower dives.

While I think #B could be a good improvement, I don't think it will do what a lot of you want, which is to make towers super threatening.

Towers should be something that inhibit diving and create a fallback for the defending team, but they should not be so powerful that a team cannot choose to take the risk of tower aggro to secure an objective/kill. I don't think we could bump up their damage without having a negative impact in that regard.

Making them target those champs properly is the lowest thing on my list of "things towers need to not be useless". They need HUGELY increased damage or attack speed against tanks. They are pretty towers past level 9 for almost 40 champions. These champs don't just dive. They tank the tower and kill it without repercussion.

RiotRiot Koalifier8 votes

I think I just fundamentally disagree that towers should be able to take on mega-tanks. If they supplement your team's damage and do around 10-15% of a tank's HP in 5-6 seconds, that seems reasonable. Any change to towers that makes them threatening to tanks during all stages of the game either:

A. Makes building tank stats completely ineffective against towers (%hp true damage, massive armor pen) and results in tanks being significantly less useful and feeling like crap; or B. Makes towers massively fuck up squishy champions, punishing minor mistakes really heavily (increased overall damage).

I don't think either A or B encourages interesting gameplay; it just helps teams with strong waveclear turtle under towers and drag out games, which isn't super fun imo.

HigeR6 votes

while this is cool, there's also the issue of tanks being hella strong not only in defense but in offense as well, like:

Amumu TahmKench DrMundo Shen Renekton Volibear Skarner Zac Malphite

I mean, if turrets can't kill them is alright, if they can kill you under turret that cannot be right :S

Take Leona for example, she's resilient as hell but she won't be able to dive alone and much less get a kill out of it, That's a good tank! just like Alistar Nautilus Singed Sion Maokai

GinoSoldier2 votes

Snip

How about increasing turret range to up to 50-75% more once the turret targets a champion for whatever reason, so that 'getting out' implies more than taking three steps and a single hit?

The reason I'd also argue for %health TRUE damage (in reasonable amounts mind you) is that it makes the time you have under turret limited and steady across the game. You don't get to that point where towers become .05 of a champion's worth because the tank is built up and just holds the aggro while your ally gets murdered pretty much retaliation-free.

As far as it's impacts on tanks would feel, tanks right now already feel too weak especially in the jungle imo, with the much more common Armor Pen stats making life for tanks much harder as early assassins can effectively kill them, at least early. And the fact that they're now efficiently countered by the Last Whisper upgrades late game, which is fine to an extent.

Also, one reason why people get majorly ticked at the base turrets is because they can't even keep up with an ADC's ability to self heal half the time once late game hits, not to mention tanks.

The one thing i'd remove from current turret behavior is how they react to items like Sunfire's Cape damage to champions which can draw aggro 'for no reason' and be frustrating. Items only mind you. No sense in letting someone like Mundo or Shyvana kill people by just walking around under turret with their AoE damage.

RiotRiot Koalifier3 votes

Hm, upgrading their range sounds potentially pretty confusing and frustrating. Laser turrets already have a little bit of lingering damage after you walk out of range, and that's not super fun.

I'm kind of confused by the tank commentary, because on the one hand you agree that %hp true damage hurts tanks more than other classes, but you also comment that tanks are having a hard time right now (tanks are actually pretty OP at the moment, Trundle Volibear etc.

exe32 votes

Glad you mentioned B, that's one of the most frustrating things about turrets poor targeting AI.

If we're talking solely targeting AI maybe they should have a sort of 'aggro' bar that causes them to always target champions until the fight actually stops. That way in your example if Fizz jumps then it will immediately retarget him when he drops back down (assuming it didn't switch to another champion).

Having turrets commit to an attack even if the enemy goes out of range would be good too, no different to the Dragon change from way back when (remember the silliness of Dragon aggro juggling?) lol.

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

Hm, the concept of an aggro bar does sounds pretty cool... like the tower is "activated" once it gets champ aggro and will now focus champs until it resets a-la patience timers on jungle camps.

I think the Dragon aggro thing made sense because of aggro juggling being borderline exploitative, and because Dragon actually moves. Turrets gaining range sounds really annoying

AMYS GRAVE4 votes

in your elise fizz example, if the damage keeps ramping on fizz then he still takes meaningful damage unless he only "tanks" two shots by dodging them with his pole and zhonyas. In the current situation between fizz pole, elise rappel, fizz zhonyas, the fourth turret shot only hits as hard as the first one should have. Even if the shots are dodged the damage needs to keep ramping up because the damage ramping is reset every time it switches champions and that leads to a situation where the 5th and 6th turret shots during a dive feel like they do no damage because the ramping keeps getting reset. If i survive a dive long enough for my turret to take 6 shots at the enemies one of them should be dead.

RiotRiot Koalifier4 votes

Hmmm, yeah, I think I echo that sentiment. If there's anything that's really coalescing for me in this thread, it's that towers resetting while you are still in the middle of getting dived feels pretty bad. Like I've sad a bunch of times, I don't work on this stuff, but I'll chat with some folks about this thread and see what they think. I can't promise that we'll make a change along those lines as I don't fully understand the design principles behind towers, but I'll follow up on it :D

Punkkee1 votes

THIS IS THE LONGEST FUCKING THREAD I'VE SEEN IN MY LIFE

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

lel now its longer do i tilt u

RiotRiot Koalifier9 votes

Personally I think they're fine. Since I started playing, I've noticed that players have just gotten so much better at diving towers, tanking for allies, and trading turret aggro. I think that towers have stayed about the same strength for a long time, it's just that players are better at dealing with towers. It's like Lee Sin, he's in every game, so we all know what to do against a Lee Sin if he jumps behind us.. we know what's coming next. Towers don't have any surprises for experienced players.

ZT Xperimentor1 votes

When you're bored and have plenty of time, mind giving this a look over? http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/AwRfrO0r-lets-talk-about-turretstowers-riot I'm curious to hear what your thoughts on the concepts a few of us have discusses; since the actual designers refuse to acknowledge it.

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

Holy crap man that post is enormous! I don't think I would say that designers are actively ignore the topic or your post. A lot of the time when I go looking for stuff to talk about on the boards, I'm looking at 10-20 minutes that I have to skim through posts, find an interesting couple, and comment, so engaging on a huge, long-form argument post is going to be too time consuming.

I think you're going to have a hard time getting attention without a more concise post topic that's a bit more focused. For example, you have a bunch of examples of tower buffs at the bottom of the post, which I think is the main part you'd want people to look at. An example post would be something like:

"Towers don't do enough to prevent early dives, making it too punishing to get behind in lane (<---problem statement/subject of post)

Hello! I think that towers need to be upgraded to keep pace with other changes in the game. Mobility, sustain, and damage-avoidance abilities have all increased over the past couple of seasons, which has moved towers toward obsolescence. I'd love to get some input on these ideas for buffing towers: "

Then you could just copy-paste your top 5 ideas there.

As far as my input on your post, I don't really have a lot to say. Personally, I don't think that towers are in a terrible place, so I disagree with the premise that they need to be buffed. Additionally, I think that buffing towers will make for less interesting plays on average, not more.

Pulling off a really good tower dive is super satisfying, whereas choking your opponent out of farm by freezing a wave is not very satisfying. Buffing towers creates an incentive for freezing lanes and starving opponents of farm, which further starves players of interesting interactions. Personally, I'd much rather try to survive a tower dive (with a chance of getting a good turnaround if the dive isn't executed well or I make a good play) than sit under tower waiting for a lane to push toward me because my lane opponent is beating me, but too afraid to dive me.

The former is just more interesting than the latter. Just my two cents. Great post either way :D

ZT Xperimentor1 votes

Yeah I spent a few hours researching, to make sure I wasn't overlooking something; I usually end up putting my foot in my mouth if I don't double check. And though I wasn't expecting a comment overnight since it was a long post; I was bummed it'd been almost entirely unnoticed after a few months, figured someone would've had the time to be curious over a weekend or something :/ On the flip-side, I've seen significantly shorter posts like you suggest, get repeatedly ridiculed & downvoted for lacking info or options; so it seemed like a split decision without an absolutely favorable outcome. Obviously I went for the long-winded all-including approach, instead of a minute long ramble that's easily forgotten.

Either way, I appreciate you glancing over it and replying so soon.

Granted I'd speculate only 1/3 of the community wants tower buffs, but I think it's a matter of perspective & taste. I'd rather have an hour long game that's neck & neck, instead of a 15 minute steamroll. Sure everyone has some kind of power fantasy, but I have other games for that; I don't want to ruin someone's day by just spawn-killing them repeatedly for a few minute game. The towers I thought were supposed to be safe zones; yeah I expect the enemy squishy to run under it to kill me when they have full build, but with 1 item it feels cheap. Indeed the high mobility champions can abuse it more so; but with the consistency the immobile ones can do it, appears like something is off.

However I also preferred the early days of league, when positioning was more important, and teamwork was required to take towers or to dive; and why I find it boring these days when most everyone tries to do everything by themselves, and get rewarded whether they succeeded or not.

But anyway, that's my pocketchange of thought, thanks for your time and feedback [slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

RiotRiot Koalifier2 votes

Yeah I guess it's a bit of a catch-22 between making long or short posts. For what it's worth, I think that short posts can be super great, but it is hard to avoid the stigma.

I'm not sure what we could do to change the way the game has evolved around tower dives, because I think it's largely a symptom of players just being better at League. Anyway, gr8 post m8

ZT Xperimentor1 votes

Yeah I avoid politics for exactly that reason. Well the pbe used be testing grounds for such things, and could be again; hopefully changes could be tweaked before anything went live, if it was successful in the pbe to begin with. Been kind of dead there since feedback seems to go largely unnoticed . . . but anyway that's a vent for another day. Again thanks for your time, I appreciate it.

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

The perception that PBE isn't used as a testing grounds makes me really sad :(

We do still put things on the PBE and look for player feedback all the time. I think we could do a way better job of communicating with you guys that we are listening and making decisions based on that feedback. Ultimately it's our failure that players don't feel heard, and we should be better.

One of the problems is that when players confirm what we already thought about something, we don't bump that thread with a "cool, thanks for the input, that's what we were expecting" kind of comment because it doesn't seem very useful. Please keep demanding our attention and keeping us honest! We can always improve Viktor

ZT Xperimentor2 votes

I'd say it was more of a problem from the game growth over time, than the fault of either side. In the early days it was easier to discuss problems both in the live & beta boards, since there was only a 100,000 players; but now that it's in the tens of millions, it's harder to be heard because (I speculate) riot staff haven't grown in a similar scale. Which means less time per employee to check said boards, and inadvertently appearing to be a lack of communication, when it's a difficult problem to circumvent normally. Perhaps it's an inevitability as a company becomes more popular, though I'd bet the depression of the economy didn't help matters either.

Yet some matters are clearly the fault one way or another, like mordekaiser (rework team) & leesin (gaming community); but they're rants for another post.

I know I don't check the pbe as often as I used to either, roughly a day's worth of testing out of a month. However due to some function changes and the previous issue; the beta feels like there's less communication than it used to. With the tribunal gone, it seems chat records aren't saved/reviewed, though that may be for live servers only. And with only a couple riot-ers looking over the beta boards (both to update it's news & discuss posts), it feels like a ghost site. Sure some posts that should be in the beta boards are posted in the live ones anyway; but I feel that ruins the suspense/surprise of upcoming changes. On the other hand it seems to be the only way to get attention on the subject, that's the disheartening part.

I know I don't speak for everyone, nor should I; but I appreciate such bumps, it's still feedback that the post was looked over. Even if it's a line-liner in agreement, it still shows that someone important was paying attention. And sometimes, that's all we need, confirmation against ignorance. Though whether or not to apply that to real life, I'd say is debatable at best.

I agree there, I know I need to work on being patient these days. Again thank you for your time and thoughtful reply.

RiotRiot Koalifier1 votes

Yeah, bulk numbers do make it tough. On top of that, most of the stuff that players want to talk about (champions, skins, balance, items, GAMEPLAY) is stuff that a fairly small number of people really have expertise on. If you were to ask me why Riot did X or Y to towers, I would have just about the same idea as you, because I don't work on that part of the game.

That leads to a lot of Rioters searching for a topic that relates to their area of expertise and coming up short. If anyone has any questions about what the actual process of taking League of Legends from an internal build to PBE to Live, I can answer those! Or if anyone wants to know what it took to get downtime to be SO SHORT (seriously, we only take the servers down for like, 30 minutes for patches), I have an idea about that too :D Normally no one cares about that unless it's broken though :(

ZT Xperimentor1 votes

Indeed, and it's why I hate forums; it's such a chore to find out who is knowledgeable about each subject, or even to ask the right people about specific things. Sure I'd like to see a sticky/pinned post listing which riot-ers work in each area of the game, but I don't think it'd be a good idea either; as the community has become disgustingly toxic, I'd suspect they would be harassed if such a post were made.

Ohh that makes more sense, I was wondering about how some posts are found. And that's not what I expected either, sorry; when I'd read your title of 'playtest analyst' I figured you were a researcher of gameplay patterns (like is item A only picked when ahead), not patching. Though now you've made me curious enough to ask; when you patch the servers, do you keep a backup of the previous patch, just in case kind of thing?

RiotRiot Koalifier1 votes

Hmmm, I should get that updated, I'm not a Playtest Analyst anymore. Your assumption is correct about what Playtesters do, but I now work as Release QA.

We do have backups of previous patches. To compare it to cooking, we keep a few batches of "leftovers" in the fridge, but not for too long because we'll run out of space in the fridge. We could always make that meal again if we want, because we hold on to the "recipe" for a patch for a long time. Of course, making a really old recipe can be very tough, because we might not have the ingredients handy anymore, so we'll have to send someone to go get them, but it could be done.

In addition to having them as a backup, eSports frequently is behind by a patch or so, depending on the timing, so they also need to have that patch at the ready to use for tournament realms.

AMYS GRAVE3 votes

The perception that PBE isn't used as a testing grounds makes me really sad :(

That perception stems from the balance reds basically saying that they cant get meaningful data from the PBE. Every time they overbuff or overnerf a champion on the PBE at the last second they say some variant of this kind of thing. Of course that's not to mention all the reported bugs that get ignored and get pushed to live because the publicity hype has already started.

RiotRiot Koalifier3 votes

To be fair, I think we really do pick up a pretty huge number of bugs from the boards, and we don't really miss a ton. I'm personally looking at the PBE bugs every day / every other day, depending on what part of the patch cycle we are in. The bigger issue has to do with timing. If you report a bug one or two days before we ship out the latest patch, we're probably not going to fix that bug before the patch because it's not worth the risk of creating a bigger problem. Instead, we'll aim to fix it in the next patch instead, or maybe as a hotfix after we can get more testing.

As to balance data from the PBE.... it's really tough to say. Having previously worked on a team that did balance-related things, it's extremely difficult to get a good idea of how something will play out on live servers. The PBE really isn't a great place for balance testing, unfortunately. MMR disparity is pretty big in the PBE due to smaller player population, and most players have fewer games played so will not be at their "true" MMR. On top of that, some people are focused on testing different things, which might detract from competitive balance feedback. For example, if I'm dead-set on testing out Kindred on PBE, but I really suck at jungling and don't know what I'm doing, my play in the game will make it harder for other players to tell whether Kindred is OP, or I'm just new to jungle.

IMO the most valuable feedback that we can get from players that is related to gameplay is stuff like this thread: feels-type feedback. If you tell a designer "hey new Skarner sucks he's really weak" - I can't do a lot with that feedback, as I don't really know how he sucks. Is his damage just too low? Does he lack tankiness? Is his E unsatisfying? The gameplay feedback that designers get from the PBE is really valuable, I've heard many people talk about it and seen Rioters post asking for it on the forums, but there's still not going to be a lot of response to balance related feedback, because too much nuance goes into balance.

That being said, please don't hesitate to post: "Hey _______ is OP wtf" as a topic. We still hear that feedback, there's just not to talk about so most of us probably won't comment XD

AMYS GRAVE2 votes

A lot of bugs are found on the PBE, but occasionally things like azir slip through and his release was quite buggy despite PBE feedback to that point.

As far as balance on the PBE is concerned for every MMR imbalance that happens you get one in the opposite direction, so it changes the sigma not the mu. You may not be able to get perfect balance off of it but i'd be shocked if the signal can't be detected through the noise.

I'm glad you brought up skarner, because when RiotRepertoir was working with him and was all over the boards i remember the feedback being very directed. His zones of power (spires) weren't in the locations he needed to have power because they severely limited his ganking potential, and even when he was in the zones there was enough counterplay to the zones that they didn't feel effective. That was some very usable balance related feedback that could have been used more effectively. If we look at what happened skarner he was weak on the PBE, then was overbuffed at the last second due to this feedback, and he didn't get the time to be tested further. I know nuance isn't the boards strong suit but to RiotRepertoir's credit, the man knows how to start positive and constructive conversations and discounting any balance related feedback doesn't seem fair. I guess it irks me a bit when people blame the PBE volunteers for giving feedback and point to skarner to discredit anything a PBE player has to say about balance. (for the record i don't have a PBE account.)

RiotRiot Koalifier2 votes

Skarner's a very interesting case for a bunch of reasons. In addition to everything that you mentioned, he also falls into a class of junglers like Udyr that, when played well, can really dominate, but when played poorly kind of fall flat. Thus his balance also relies heavily on how well players understand how to utilize his kit, as opposed to someone like Vi who will have pretty successful presence on a flatter experience curve. It doesn't mean that only certain players can give balance feedback on him, but it does mean that it takes more games played to get a good feel on how to utilize his kit.

I can't say I followed the PBE feedback on Skarner too carefully, but I do know that Repertoir is super active on the boards (and not just in his mega-post). I hope that the learning we took from that experience wasn't "don't listen to PBE on balance" but instead "don't make big balance changes without time to test them". In that case, it would've been probably a better call to tell players on the PBE "We hear you that Skarner feels weak right now, but we won't have time to test new changes before shipping him live. Instead, we're going to prep some buffs for him to hotfix if he's looking really week this patch, but if he looks like he's in an okay place, we'll hold back." Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but I think we learned a lot from that experience.

On the topic of blaming PBE volunteers for bugs/balance..... it's really annoying when that happens. The PBE is a tool, it's super helpful, but it's not going to catch everything. PBE testers prevent major crashes from going live on a regular basis. They catch broken OP/UP champs and items from time to time as well. PBE players also help to catch a lot of graphical bugs on skins. Just like the QA at Riot, it's not really feasible for them to catch every bad bug or OP thing.

Rozair4 votes

I'm surprised that towers haven't changed around players growing in skill like the jungle has. The jungle monsters get buffed when players learn how to handle them. Every mob is different and when players know how to handle them after a while the balance team will adjust the jungle to slow or speed up camp killing.

Now towers have not changed based on players learning curve but flat amounts. For instance in bottom lane it seems as the first one to go back to the base loses their tower in one push.

Adcs Job is to kill towers but I think that they can burst them down to fast. Specially jinx and tristana. Idk if they were designed to be the best tower killers but they can kill a tower halve as fast as say ashe due to their passive attack speed and bomb.

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

I disagree, towers **have **changed to keep up with players learning how to deal with them. They used to be significantly easier to kill, but received multiple rounds of buffs to prevent fast pushing, Tryndamere solo killing towers with no minions, and other cheese strats. We haven't buffed their damage output significantly (although laser turrets were really OP until the mini-exhaust was removed), but I'm not sure that it would be a good idea to increase their damage.

I don't work on the balance/towerbuffing team, but I'm really not sold that increasing their damage is a good solution. You shouldn't be completely safe under your tower. Think of it as .5-.75 champions worth of strength in a fight. If the enemy team tries to fight 2 vs 2.75, they should lose, unless you and your lane partner are really low hp / behind / making mistakes. Buffing towers buffs sustain/farm champs which slows down game pacing which makes me a sad Teemo

xReadyPlayerOnex2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Riot Koalifier,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=yVtNgptt,comment-id=0004000300000000000000010000,timestamp=2016-01-08T19:13:57.272+0000)

I disagree, towers **have **changed to keep up with players learning how to deal with them. They used to be significantly easier to kill, but received multiple rounds of buffs to prevent fast pushing, Tryndamere solo killing towers with no minions, and other cheese strats. We haven't buffed their damage output significantly (although laser turrets were really OP until the mini-exhaust was removed), but I'm not sure that it would be a good idea to increase their damage.

I don't work on the balance/towerbuffing team, but I'm really not sold that increasing their damage is a good solution. You shouldn't be completely safe under your tower. Think of it as .5-.75 champions worth of strength in a fight. If the enemy team tries to fight 2 vs 2.75, they should lose, unless you and your lane partner are really low hp / behind / making mistakes. Buffing towers buffs sustain/farm champs which slows down game pacing which makes me a sad Teemo

Your not sure we should increase tower damage? You're either lying, haven't played a game in 3 months or dead. Check your pulse. Then go increase tower damage.

Decrit13 votes

that is rude as fuck

xReadyPlayerOnex1 votes

{quoted}

that is rude as fuck

It is, just as rude as them not fixing them. FAST. They should have been fixed in the first week. This long is unforgivable. and I'm trolling every red I can till they're changed. It's a complete fuck you to the people playing this game to make towers what they are now. They were buffed when Trynd could sit under tower and kill them with ult. He can do that again... so why aren't they buffed? If the season goes live in this state I'm done playing.

Decrit8 votes

dude

you are passing somebody as a DEAD, and giving order as is your SLAVE

please, get your head cooled off

AMYS GRAVE2 votes

Buffing towers buffs sustain/farm champs which slows down game pacing which makes me a sad Teemo

Isn't fast game pacing a real problem right now? Seems like a solution to me....

boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/1VymTVKu-game-pacing-and-you

RiotRiot Koalifier2 votes

So, sort of? It's much more nuanced than just "fast" games being a problem, but rather that, overall, nobody wants a bunch of snowballed games. In addition to that, no one wants to be stuck in a snowballed game that it feels like they can't possibly come back from.

Increasing the power of towers would allow losing, snowballed-against teams to survive for longer, but it would not actually give them the tools to make a comeback. Again, it kind of goes back to the example of waveclear heavy comps. Stronger towers = buff to waveclear = killing towers is harder = games take longer even when you're already winning. Based on that post (I had not read it yet), seems like buffing the overall strength of towers would increase the number of snowbally games.

Retillin1 votes

Isn't soaking up XP/gold ways to "catch up"? If the enemy mid is up 2 levels and you can stall it out for a bit and get the difference under 1 level, doesn't that give you extra ability to come back? (getting level 2 ult, or more HP, or allows you to ward why the enemy is trying to push your lane, ect...)

RiotRiot Koalifier2 votes

Yes, but we're talking about snowballed games vs. close games. If you turtle under tower to stall out when you're behind by 1k-2k gold, that can be pretty effective. When you turtle under tower when behind by 4-6k gold, you're just delaying the inevitable.

Turtling under tower with a small disadvantage is pretty effective right now imo. The enemy team has the onus to initiate, which costs key cooldowns normally, as well as having to deal with the damage that the tower will deal. That gives the losing team the advantage of the counter-initiate as well as the tower damage.

Retillin4 votes

Well, outside of a pro game, 4-6k gold disadvantage isn't a game killer. The way the death timers are now, and the seemingly easy to take towers, one won team fight under towers can lead to a game victory at 30 mins.

We were told in the State of the Season, that games are 7% faster now. Could you answer a few questions on that, if know the answers?

  1. How long is the average game now?
  2. What is the gold difference between teams now at the end of games vs what they were before pre-season changes?
  3. What is the median time on surrenders now vs before pre-season?
  4. On the surrenders, what is the gold difference now vs before pre-season?

Oh, and thank you for being open. Even if I don't always agree with your stance. :)

Flemman1 votes

the only problem with emphasing towerdive over freeze farming is that it give one more reason to pick tanky/cc support over sustain support.

If there was change made to help sustain sup survive those dive it will be fine, but we only saw nerf during to them during this preseason (meaning that if they don't stomp lane, they will feed hard)

RiotRiot Koalifier5 votes

Hm, I suppose you could argue that, but on the other hand, sustain laners have an easier time setting up dives because they keep their lane at higher HP. I think it's a reasonable balance, besides Soraka OP

Flemman4 votes

Soraka from time to time OP (if your adc can't dodge Q :p)

Thresh all year at top (if your adc can't dodge Q ^^)

RiotRiot Koalifier6 votes

While thresh is really popular all the time because he's very fun and engaging, he's actually one of the lower winrate supports. Same thing happens with Lee Sin most of the time; he stays in flavor because he's fun and has a lot of die-hard mains, but his winrate usually doesn't spike up very high.

Krys Star9 votes

But, as many of the balance devs have stated: win rate does not correlate to champion power at all. They said so themselves: If Azir, LeBlanc and Ryze ever reach 50% win rate, it's because they are too strong given how powerful their kits are.

Because a champion's win rate is low, doesn't disqualify them from being a bs champion. Thresh and Lee Sin are highly picked, because they bring 90% of what many champions bring to the table in one kit. Thresh has the kill potential, the peels, the escape, a shield, powerful slows, innately tanky thanks to his passive and build style, damage, and he's ranged, to top it off. All he's lacking are heals and silences, otherwise he has everything going for him.

Same with Lee Sin. He's a fighter+assassin+tank hybrid that has amazing peel, ganks, self-sustain and shields, extreme mobility, tank busting ultimate with a sick nasty AD ratio, execute built into his Q, a crippling aoe, and has MANY windows of opportunities that he can provide both for himself and his allies. Lee Sin has a lot going for him.

The only reason why their win rate would be relatively low, despite being very frustrating to play against, is that they have a high skill cap. High pick rate with a high skill cap, means higher chances of failures among amateur and casual Lee Sin and Thresh players. You should never correlate win rates to champion performance. Meddler, Repertoir, Morello, etc. already frown on players that do, and it's pretty cringing that you just did.

P.S. As a Soraka main, your Soraka comment really aggravated me although I chose not to be uncivil about it. Be constructive as to why she's op, unless you were just kidding which wasn't clear in your post.

RiotRiot Koalifier5 votes

Very good point, win rate does not necessarily correlate precisely to champion power. Along with the caveat that I threw into another post, I'm not a designer, I'm just a dude. Morello/Repertoir/Meddler are all significantly more knowledgeable than I am about game design, so I'm going to sound silly compared to them.

Sorry for coming across poorly, I was making a poor attempting at memeing :(

Personally, I'm not a big fan of Soraka and I'd much rather play against Thresh, but that's because I like playing aggressive poke lanes which get rekt by Raka really hard.

As a comment on winrates, they can be a useful tool to help evaluate champion strength, but they should never be the only tool that you use. In the case of both Thresh and Lee Sin, they have low winrates for both first time players and for highly experienced players (http://champion.gg/champion/Thresh http://champion.gg/champion/LeeSin) each at 49% respectively even for players with 100+ games on them, as compared to Raka (http://champion.gg/champion/Soraka) whose curve looks all kinds of crazy, as well as beginning at 50%.

So yes, I wouldn't just look at the winrate of one of these champions on average and say "wow that champ is OP", but I think it's fair to use data to back up your own instinct to say "man, it's really hard to win lane against Soraka, which seems to be supported by her 50-55% winrate on average depending on player experience rate." Hope that makes a bit more sense.

LankPants2 votes

as compared to Raka (http://champion.gg/champion/Soraka) whose curve looks all kinds of crazy, as well as beginning at 50%.

That's because Raka's probably more influenced by her partners skill than most supports, if you have a good ADC you most likely win and if you have a bad one there's not that much you can do.

As a comment on winrates, they can be a useful tool to help evaluate champion strength, but they should never be the only tool that you use. In the case of both Thresh and Lee Sin, they have low winrates for both first time players and for highly experienced players

The problem people have with Thresh and especially Lee is that if you go into a game and don't ban one of them you can expect to see one picked. In the case of Lee he's more likely to be picked at that point than not. It's just not fun for a champ to have a 40% pick rate.

So yes, I wouldn't just look at the winrate of one of these champions on average and say "wow that champ is OP", but I think it's fair to use data to back up your own instinct to say "man, it's really hard to win lane against Soraka, which seems to be supported by her 50-55% winrate on average depending on player experience rate." Hope that makes a bit more sense.

I'd disagree. There's just too many factors here. Which ADCs are they played with? Who picks them, when? These factors affect win rate more than balance.

xReadyPlayerOnex2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Riot Koalifier,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=yVtNgptt,comment-id=0004000300000000000000020000,timestamp=2016-01-08T19:04:32.737+0000)

Hm, I suppose you could argue that, but on the other hand, sustain laners have an easier time setting up dives because they keep their lane at higher HP. I think it's a reasonable balance, besides Soraka OP

This comment shows a lack of understanding of gameplay.

RiotRiot Koalifier4 votes

How so? A jungler is at significantly less risk tower diving when there is a high sustain support there who can either heal him or tank the tower themselves? A tank like Leona has a very risky towerdive because she's so all-in, whereas Soraka can just let her adc/jungle tank while spam healing them and denying the enemy responding with long range silence.

IcyPepper3 votes

I think you make a fair point.

Soraka is decent at setting up tower dives, but that requires someone else to do the work. Depending on the lane-matchup, it's not always a good idea to send your ADC to do it, though (especially against anyone with a hook or displacement).

On the other hand, Soraka only helps someone dive better, and the set-up is still required (which can be denied if your jungler/other diver is spotted by wards). Tank supports can just dive and get out, and doesn't require as much set-up (but still some, mind you!). I think that's why people are griping, I guess? But yeah, Soraka definitely turns a decent dive into a great dive!

Also, um, I don't think Thresh is the number one played support because he's fun to play. I think it has more to do with that he's often played in LCS, and has a great kit. If people played supports based on how fun they are, we would have a more even distribution because supports, well, support. Lots of people are into that. If one does that better (or appears to, like LCS play), people are going to play them more.

Honestly, a lot of people think Thresh should be nerfed because he crowds out other supports, but I'm in the boat that every support should be at his level. Instead of making Thresh the Lee Sin of supports, he ought to be the Renekton bar for supporting.

More from [ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

More by Rozair