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


Proving grounds initial feedback.

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fox P McCloud

Senior Member

06-09-2012

I will say that making it so that you can't heal/shop once inhib is down is hugely disappointing.

I've never had a game become "stagnant" because of this--it might lengthen it out, a bit, but it also gives the enemy time to actually counter-attack; if they can't heal/shop, then games will be decided way earlier than they currently are.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zielmann

Senior Member

06-09-2012

Quote:
Opreich:
Won't it also prevent comebacks though?


I have played a lot of ARAM's in my day. When I've had to play with the silly backing after inhib rule in place, I can tell you that it doesn't really make a difference in the vast majority of games. I've probably only seen 4 or 5 comebacks that happened because of this rule. The rest of the time, it just adds frustration to the team who basically dominated the game, because they now have to wait sometimes even 15 more minutes just to be able to push down the nexus after the inhib dropped.

Quote:
Fox P McCloud:
I will say that making it so that you can't heal/shop once inhib is down is hugely disappointing.

I've never had a game become "stagnant" because of this--it might lengthen it out, a bit, but it also gives the enemy time to actually counter-attack; if they can't heal/shop, then games will be decided way earlier than they currently are.


ARAM, as it originally was (and as it should be) is generally decided by who takes the first inhib. It was just a fact of the game, and something everybody recognized. The games where that may not have been the case would have, by default, been extremely close games. You know, where one team dies taking their inhib, so the other team gets to push back across and get theirs as well.

These games were fun and had a lot of tension because they were actually even. But when a team comes out with an early advantage and is able to keep pushing that advantage, they should win the game easily. It's just the nature of ARAM.

If you want to play a game with epic* comebacks, go play ARAB.

I really, really hope Riot sticks to their guns with this one, and keeps considering the back-after-inhib rule as toxic and/or anti-fun. I know there will be a fair bit of complaining on the forums about it because so many people have grown to know ARAM's with that rule in place.


*People usually think these are epic in nature, but in reality it is caused by the death-timers massively favoring the losing team, to where it gets that same annoying feeling to the dominating team as you have in ARAM's where people can heal after inhib is down.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wyl

Recruiter

06-09-2012

ziggs OP


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

George W Nome

Game Designer

06-09-2012

Quote:
Opreich:
Won't it also prevent comebacks though?

We've found that there's a good bit of natural swing that occurs already.
  • The lane is long, which means revived aggressors take a while to reach the opponent's base.
  • Defenders have the terrain and turret advantage.
  • Defenders start the fight with full health and spent gold.
This generally means that even without an artificial rules advantage, you'll find that unless the aggressors are absolutely steamrolling, there will be a continued battle of attrition in each base. It's a natural comeback mechanism. This isn't to say we can't add it in the future, but we found in testing that the map worked well without it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zielmann

Senior Member

06-09-2012

I've gotten to play a couple games now, finally.

First off, it's great, and I absolutely love it. And it's pretty funny to see the people who have never played ARAM try to wander back to the fountain at low health.

I have one main concern, though, and that has to do with the XP gain aura on the map. Both games I played were reasonably one-sided, the first moreso than the second. I think the first game ended when we were about level 16, maybe 17.

But the second game, where the other team put up a little more resistance, we definitely all hit 18. The thing that makes me concerned is that this was still a fairly short/one-sided game. I worry that an evenly-matched game could see players reaching 18 a bit too early, actually. The gold gain rate is nice, because at least people weren't hitting full builds super fast, like in ARAB. But I feel like the xp gain could be decreased slightly, so the levels seem to ramp up a bit more in-phase with the progress of your build.

I guess, in short, I would prefer a leveling scheme somewhere between old ARAM (bit too slow for many people) and what is currently implemented on PG.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Doola147

Senior Member

06-09-2012

Darius got graphics issues on it & yorick ult doesnt work.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zielmann

Senior Member

06-09-2012

Also, if you could disable queue-dodging on this map, that would be great.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Opreich

Senior Member

06-09-2012

Quote:
RiotNome:
We've found that there's a good bit of natural swing that occurs already.
  • The lane is long, which means revived aggressors take a while to reach the opponent's base.
  • Defenders have the terrain and turret advantage.
  • Defenders start the fight with full health and spent gold.
This generally means that even without an artificial rules advantage, you'll find that unless the aggressors are absolutely steamrolling, there will be a continued battle of attrition in each base. It's a natural comeback mechanism. This isn't to say we can't add it in the future, but we found in testing that the map worked well without it.

In the few games that I've played this isn't the case at all.

Its incredibly snowbally. If one team gets and Ace they can take 1 and a 1/2 towers with ease, and gain complete control over all the health packs, allowing them to saty topped up even without a healer.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

George W Nome

Game Designer

06-09-2012

Quote:
Opreich:
In the few games that I've played this isn't the case at all.

Its incredibly snowbally. If one team gets and Ace they can take 1 and a 1/2 towers with ease, and gain complete control over all the health packs, allowing them to saty topped up even without a healer.

I'll have to jump in a few games and see myself (downloading client right now). Our office games may have been skewed due to a limited player pool


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Illyriomysterio

Senior Member

06-09-2012

We had a really stun-heavy team while the other had Sona *and* Soraka. They ended up toasting us despite playing defensively (only the two "supports&quot and despite my team playing a little smarter further in, only got pubstomped for the rest of the match.