Is Dominion the reason for the hypercarry nerfs?

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

Saìnt

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whyumai View Post
It would be great if certain ranged carries (ashe) were nerfed as well.

She has to be one of the few global abilities left, and, she scales well into late game. Also, perma-slow, has lot of utility (hawkshot, etc), and free gold passive (on hawkshot no less). AoE slow with low mana cost and low cooldown probably helps too. If you want to know why tanky-DpS melee champions have to have so many free stats: look at Ashe.
Good thing she dies in two hits.

And is easy to shut down.

Has no sustain.

etc.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Brackhar

Features Designer

08-08-2011
2 of 2 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by OeSan View Post
losing is anti fun too, lets just let everyone win every game.
That's not the point. One of the implications of a hyper carry is that they will always beat you 1v1 essentially regardless of what yours and their health is at (within reason). This leads to incredibly lopsided encounters that ultimately aren't enjoyable. At least with simply a carry there's a wider range of situations where the defender may actually come out victorious depending on their item makeup and play ability.

I think being able to react to situations is very important for fun gameplay, and that's one of the reasons I dislike hyper carries as a concept because the possible ways you can react are greatly diminished.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

IS1d6d3ffc5d25bf1bdf6f0

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
That's not the point. One of the implications of a hyper carry is that they will always beat you 1v1 essentially regardless of what yours and their health is at (within reason). This leads to incredibly lopsided encounters that ultimately aren't enjoyable. At least with simply a carry there's a wider range of situations where the defender may actually come out victorious depending on their item makeup and play ability
Does this philosophy means you're looking at nerfing duelists/anti-carries/assassins even more too? Those are the champions usually built to win 1v1s after all. Much more so than carries


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

outfoxxed

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

Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brackhar View Post
That's not the point. One of the implications of a hyper carry is that they will always beat you 1v1 essentially regardless of what yours and their health is at (within reason). This leads to incredibly lopsided encounters that ultimately aren't enjoyable. At least with simply a carry there's a wider range of situations where the defender may actually come out victorious depending on their item makeup and play ability.

I think being able to react to situations is very important for fun gameplay, and that's one of the reasons I dislike hyper carries as a concept because the possible ways you can react are greatly diminished.
twitch is a (was a) hyper carry. in 1v1 situations he would lose most of the time. kayle is a strong 1v1 but nowhere near the best.

also tanky dps win 1v1's almost 100% of the time?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Waldgeist

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brackhar View Post
One of the implications of a hyper carry is that they will always beat you 1v1 essentially regardless of what yours and their health is at (within reason). This leads to incredibly lopsided encounters that ultimately aren't enjoyable
Why should that matter in a team game?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

ZallKlos

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldgeist View Post
Why should that matter in a team game?
Because Dominion promotes small scale fights, where champions like Jax, Trynd, Yi really shine.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sessamo

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alidfe View Post
Does this philosophy means you're looking at nerfing duelists/anti-carries/assassins even more too? Those are the champions usually built to win 1v1s after all. Much more so than carries
Do you often hear a whistling, when concepts fly right over your head?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

JonTehKnight

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

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by OeSan View Post
losing is anti fun too, lets just let everyone win every game.
I'm just going to direct you to this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinkaman View Post
"Anti-fun" gets misused more and more everyday.

Zileas was referring to a very specific case: mechanics that are in and of themselves destructive to other gameplay mechanics.

That's what anti means: people these days tend to use it as a catch-all prefix for "opposite", but the core meaning is something that has an annihilitory relationship with a given element. "Anti-fun" isn't something that's not fun, it's something that's primary purpose is to remove other fun elements from the game space.

Compare and contrast silence and mana burn.

Silence is an active ability: it contains a gameplay component in which the user has to identify who and more importantly when to silence. It also creates gameplay for the target in response to this; the target may decide to cast abilities prematurely, or play defensively to outlast the silence. Their options are restricted, but there are actually more gameplay choices created because of this.

When mana burn works, it removes the target's ability set in absolute terms. There is no created gameplay, no counter-play, no decisions on either side. Whether or not this is overpowered is irrelevant, because there is no meaningful gameplay; all that has happened is that the target's mechanics for having fun have been annihilated.

There are lots of things in any game that will have to be "unfun", especially in a zero-sum competitive multiplayer game. Losing isn't fun. Dying isn't fun. Having cooldowns and using up all your mana or other resources isn't fun. But unfun isn't the same as anti-fun. In good game design, unfun aspects exist only so that fun elements, feelings, and experiences of higher magnitudes can exist, such as accomplishment; the benefit exceeds the cost. Anti-fun is referring to mechanics with no or very marginal benefit in spite of a steep cost.

Edit: A similar non-design related example is the usage of the word "anti-social." It's increasingly being used as a synonym for introverted, when the word actually refers to a psychological disorder in which a person is hostile to social interactions, to the point of actually seeking harm to others.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Flak153

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Jax RIP


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jaikaro

Senior Member

08-08-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brackhar View Post
That's not the point. One of the implications of a hyper carry is that they will always beat you 1v1 essentially regardless of what yours and their health is at (within reason). This leads to incredibly lopsided encounters that ultimately aren't enjoyable. At least with simply a carry there's a wider range of situations where the defender may actually come out victorious depending on their item makeup and play ability.

I think being able to react to situations is very important for fun gameplay, and that's one of the reasons I dislike hyper carries as a concept because the possible ways you can react are greatly diminished.
Why is one champ being able to beat certain others in a 1v1 situation all the time bad? Silly Brackhar, this isn't a 1v1 game.