Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Why are some champs expensive and not others?

1
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Manasticks

Senior Member

12-15-2010

It is a known fact that champions costed by how difficult it was to play them.
Thus when open beta came out, champions like Yi (used to be considered strong) and Ashe (the champ you played in the beginning during tutorial) were 450 since they were easy to play.

Now that a year passed with nerfs/buffs, why aren't prices changing? Kayle, a 450 champ, is still difficult to use even for beginners, and you hardly see her in ranked matches. What about Garen? He is considered very easy to use, and yet he was and still is 3150 IP, So is Riot saying that Garen is harder to use than Alistar, who's only 1350 IP?

Can someone explain to me now what is the price setter and why aren't there any 450 and 1350 champs after Poppy being produced? Are the difficulty settings of these champs really that hard? Was MF such a hard champion to use that she had to be 6300?
I'm really just curious.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mandolus

Senior Member

12-15-2010

It also has to do with how much work went into the champ and probably a bit of how popular Riot thinks they're going to be.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Eydolon

Senior Member

12-15-2010

I think its a combination of randomness, favouritism, hype, design difficulty, marketing opportunity.

For example, irelia was expensive because she caused a lot of hype, until we all know what happened to her design.... but they were aware that irelia was awaited a by a lot of players so is natural that they coulkd use it as a chance to profit.

Trundle is kinda ugly and was not overhyped or demanded by fanbase..or simply didnt showed any special marketing opportunity to make him worth max IP.

Cassiopeia seems to be very elaborated design wise (at least visually) so maybe they think she deserves that price.

With older champions.... maybe it was their difficulty level... but i think that with most of them the price was set with some kind of randomness.


Of course all of this is coming from my ass so im not sure :P


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Momciloo

Member

12-15-2010

This world is all about money


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Manasticks

Senior Member

12-15-2010

so profit comes into play..


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mr Fehr

Senior Member

12-15-2010

They are priced on how fun they are supposed to be.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

j2QJjm9Q07WRRBRT

Member

12-15-2010

money money money


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Har

Senior Member

12-15-2010

Quote:
Manasticks:
It is a known fact that champions costed by how difficult it was to play them.
.


False. Nobody from Riot has EVER stated this to my knowledge.

If you think they have, then link the source. But no. There's always speculation from players on what determines champion difficulty, sure; with most new players defaulting to "difficulty" as the most obvious. Other guesses include fun factor, uniqueness of mechanics, accessibility, originality, work put into creating them, randomness, etc etc.... but nobody from Riot has ever confirmed or denied any of it.


1