Don't like the direction of Balance

First Riot Post
12345612 ... 17
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

JunkRamen

Senior Member

03-24-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliras View Post
They nerfed the one part of Gragas that was good without compensating anything else. Why?
Because he's still a **** good champion and if you don't know that then you don't play enough Gragas.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Saffire

Senior Member

03-24-2011

The only one of these that's recent is the Gragas nerf. Which means you're worried about the former balance direction, not the current. JunkRamen's analysis of your champion choices is spot on.

The nerfs also had nothing to do with being anti-fun, so you fail on that point as well.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

shmemma

Member

03-24-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saffire View Post
The only one of these that's recent is the Gragas nerf. Which means you're worried about the former balance direction, not the current. JunkRamen's analysis of your champion choices is spot on.

The nerfs also had nothing to do with being anti-fun, so you fail on that point as well.
They're just examples of poor balance decisions.

-The original shaco nerfs were justified. But the patches after patches of nerfs after were not.
-Olaf was never overpowered. Riot also admitted that these nerfs were a mistake.
-Gragas was only too strong with the locket visage combo. Where is that now?
-Jax and fiddle were "Too strong" back in the day... but what if their old kits were available now? Fiddle's too entirely dependent on an RNG silence and an ultimate that has a 2 second prep time... only to get kited, knocked back, knocked up, or simply stunned so it becomes useless.

Post AP-jax nerf, he was still very powerful. But what if he hadn't been changed since then, would he still be a strong pick now? He would still suffer from many of the same things current jax does - Many new champions have cc or slows, his ramp-up takes too long and falls off too easily, and his defenses against casters has always been awful. Old jax (After the ap jax nerf) would, in my opinion, still be in the same place new jax is.

Maybe even old fiddle too.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alaphonse

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-24-2011

I feel this man ssrly

SHACO was afraid of at all times then a couple of "nerfs" . . .

yes the nerf to inveterate locket was necessary ( ionia vs noxus game watch the udyr )

gragas isnt played at all

garen is a joke

xin is still ok if fed mid game


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

JunkRamen

Senior Member

03-24-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by shmemma View Post
They're just examples of poor balance decisions.

-The original shaco nerfs were justified. But the patches after patches of nerfs after were not.
-Olaf was never overpowered. Riot also admitted that these nerfs were a mistake.
-Gragas was only too strong with the locket visage combo. Where is that now?
-Jax and fiddle were "Too strong" back in the day... but what if their old kits were available now? Fiddle's too entirely dependent on an RNG silence and an ultimate that has a 2 second prep time... only to get kited, knocked back, knocked up, or simply stunned so it becomes useless.
Again, Shaco and Olaf are both still doing fine, so how were they overnerfed?

Olaf was overpowered. Not ridiculously so, but his nerf wasn't incredibly harsh either.

Gragas is strong regardless of the locket visage combo. He has very strong counter-initiation, chasing, retreating, farm, and a decent poke. W remains one of the best abilities in the game for soaking up damage and baiting.

Jax would likely still be one of the top tanky DPS and would deal better with the Zhonya's Ring split better than most AP characters. Fiddlesticks' silence would still have been one of the most overpowered abilities in the game and his ult needs more than a simple stun to be countered.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CaptainBusta

Senior Member

03-24-2011

I think the direction of balance is strange. They see a champ and notice "why isn't <champ> played anymore?" In order to get the champ within the games balance they nerf ALL OTHER OPTIONS. Was it really necessary to nerf every beefy champ last patch? Not that you're done or anything. Soon you're going to nerf Alistair/Singed I'm sure. It's not Riot's job to balance the game around the fact no one will buy last whisper.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sabnitron

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-24-2011

A) You're looking at things in a vacuum, without context.

B) It's Elo, not ELO. It's a proper noun, not an acronym.

C) Not all changes are balanced around the meta-game on our servers. There are also European servers, and the play styles are very different there.

Edit: btw, Olaf is more than fine.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Guinsoo

Game Designer

03-24-2011
1 of 2 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by shmemma View Post
I don't like the direction that Guinsoo and the development team are taking towards the balance of this game.

Preface:
In the history of league, there have clearly been overpowered champions. Champions that, even in a 5v5 premade scenario, were make it or break it characters. Old TF, Release day Xin Zhao, the original incarnation of AP Jax come to mind.

Then there have been the "Too strong" champions that were common first picks, or even just always picked in both premade and solo queue scenarios. Old Garen is a good example of this - his Sunfire build set the bar for "Unkillable tanky dps." Old garen didn't break the game (except maybe on TT), but he was a very strong champion that needed to be toned down slightly.

Then there have been the strong "Pubstomping" characters. While these characters may dominate unorganized teams, the game isn't based on the principle that unorganized teams dictate the balance of characters. Characters like Xin, Urgot, Renekton, Nidalee, Shaco, and others that fit a similar category fall into this classification. These characters are not overpowered, but they are strong picks in solo queue because have kits that are easy to "Anti-lane" with.


Many patches ago, we saw huge Olaf nerfs. Olaf did not break the game in any way shape or form, and was not even a common pick in premade games. Riot admitted that it was a mistake to do so. But what was the reasoning behind it?

In the same patch that the Innervating locket was removed (A gragas nerf), we also saw further Gragas nerfs. Gragas had been untouched for a long time, and what made him so popular was his reliance on Locket + Visage combo, which was removed. Why were further nerfs necessary?

In the same patch Sunfire stacking was removed, we saw Garen reduced to garbage. Why did they feel the need to break a character completely instead of taking baby steps to tone him down?

After Shaco was nerfed completely, we saw more nerfs for (if I remember correctly) 4 patches in a row. Considering that almost overnight, Shaco lost his popularity as a common first pick/first ban, why was this necessary?

This last patch we saw further nerfs on Gragas. Gragas was not breaking the game, nor was he even considered too strong by the community. But then, Morello gave his reasoning: "We wanted to curb his power before he got popular." Why should game developers stop something that isn't even a problem? (See Olaf).

Jax and Fiddlesticks are two characters that used to be popular because of their relative strength. I think it's a unanimous opinion that both characters are among the weakest picks in the game currently. It has a little to do with the nerfs patch after patch, but it also has to do with several factors, such as a large increase in the amount of champs with CC, the increasing ability of players to counter such predictable playstyles, and the amount of new champions that can simply do their job better. Had jax and fiddle remained untouched, would they still be too strong today?



Many nerfs are made in the crusade of "Anti-fun." But what does that even mean? Anything could be misconstrued as anti-fun in this game. Dying is anti fun. Being stunned is anti-fun. Being zoned is anti-fun. Being counter jungled is anti-fun. Being perma-slowed by red buff or ashe is anti-fun. Not being able to burst down a tanky dps is anti-fun. Not being able to catch rammus is anti-fun. Wards are anti-fun.

But they're all part of the game. You can't cater to the low ELO players that can't deal with the most basic of strategies, or that can't learn how to defeat poor players behind easy to use characters (Annie, Vlad, Renekton, Sion, etc.).

You also shouldn't nerf something that isn't a problem in the -CURRENT- state of the game. You never know when playstyles shift, or when characters lose popularity just because the state of the game changes.

TL-DR - stop changing things that don't need to be changed.
The only thing I really agree with is that I'm not sure if we should be nerfing champions that we *KNOW* are overpowered that the community just hasn't caught onto yet. This is not a black and white question, there are good arguments for going either way.

Other than that, I don't really agree except for that we went too far with Garen. Olaf is still too strong. Gragas is fine. Fiddle is fine. Shaco is more than fine. Jax could use some love, Garen is getting some love.

I don't want to turn this into an anti-fun thread, so please reread what Zileas said about that. I don't think you really understand that part. Also, when have we ever used anti-fun as a basis to nerf something? Anti-fun is more about fundamental design, and has nothing to do with balance.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Warscythes

Senior Member

03-24-2011

Garen is getting buffed?

Next patch pl0x?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Signs

Senior Member

03-24-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinsoo View Post
The only thing I really agree with is that I'm not sure if we should be nerfing champions that we *KNOW* are overpowered that the community just hasn't caught onto yet. This is not a black and white question, there are good arguments for going either way.

Other than that, I don't really agree except for that we went too far with Garen. Olaf is still too strong. Gragas is fine. Fiddle is fine. Shaco is more than fine. Jax could use some love, Garen is getting some love.

I don't want to turn this into an anti-fun thread, so please reread what Zileas said about that. I don't think you really understand that part. Also, when have we ever used anti-fun as a basis to nerf something? Anti-fun is more about fundamental design, and has nothing to do with balance.
Shaco is not fine you still not fixed all his bugs
A buggy character is not a fine one If i Q with shaco before a galio uses ult and dont set a jitb down to unstealth i still get taunted back into his ult
My E does not hit people once they go in bushes,
When i W it takes a while for the jitb to even fear sometimes It doesnt even fear them but the surrounding enviroment
hmm there was a thread on this somewhere


12345612 ... 17