Bye Bye Supports

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

Silentcoyote

Senior Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Battletick View Post
That's buffing the income of the person who takes 0 CS, it doesn't buff supports at all. Basically you want traditional supports to feel like they're poor even though you're giving them more money. I don' think I'll ever play Janna again after these changes. :/
Uh yeah it is ok. The difference between a fed Lissandra and Lissandra is gold. Not ratios.
I can't believe there are people *****ing about this.
Supports are not suppose to be burst machines. They can hurt, but they're primarily suppose to provide utility. Hence the CC scaling.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SiIly LiIly

Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post

If you want to do big damage, then I actually don't understand why you are playing a support character.
In regards to this, Morello. The reason I'd want to play say someone like lulu top or mid is because I love that character, I love their kit, I love how they can function in a solo lane when put in the right hands.
See, it's not just about lulu being labeled as a support class so I feel I have to just take her support, I think we should be able to express our own playstyles through the champions we find it appropriate to do so.

I enjoy quite a bit of AD Lulu top/AP Lulu mid, and I hate to see it go you know? I just think there could've been ways to tone the supports down to fit the gold income without nerfing their ability to carry or function in other lanes.

I'd just like a clear cut answer on why you had to beat the 'support' champs out of everything else but support?
I hope you can find a way to change your mind on some of the support nerfs (ideally the nerf on lulu's passive and E ratios) to both make them under control with mass amounts of AP/AD, while also giving players the ability to express themselves through their play style with any of the champions regardless if they're labeled as a support champion or not.


I'd very much enjoy a reply on if tuning the supports in a different way so they can still be played in different ways/roles is an attractive enough idea for you to consider.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Maximum Angel

Junior Member

11-20-2013

See, my issue with the S4 support changes is that you'll need to nerf the base numbers, both for damage and utility, in order to give them late-game scaling.

The purpose of a support is to cover for or spoon-feed their carry with their utility or damage. That's why support Fiddlesticks is a thing, and support Elise was a thing; they have long-duration stuns at Lv1 or Lv2, which let their carry snowball. One less damaging spell in their kit means nothing when they have a partner who can attack through it. It also gives those utility mages or early-game mages a role in bottom lane, to just poke or burst down the enemy until their laning partner picks up the last hit.

Since the changes are an early-game nerf, and supports still aren't expecting gold, I get the feeling that they just won't hit the utility values they used to have unless the game drags on for 50+ minutes; long enough that the carries no longer need the gold, so the supports can get CS priority. One of the reasons LoL is more popular that its overpower-to-balance counterpart is the fact that players can end the game early. No one wants a game to drag on for 50+ minutes, unless your name is Nasus, Veigar, or Sion. Long games can result in toxicity, as people get bored and want to end it, or AFK to go do something else.

It's not that I hate these changes. I think it's a good thing to experiment with. But you always look at the pros and cons. And consistency is always a pro.

tl:dr; I feel that S4 changes to supports will slow the game down and not actually change them in the mid-game section.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

EYO TEETO

Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Plainview View Post
Except you have to buy 100+ AP to match their current utility levels. So...
Okay, I'll bite. Current passive gold gain is about 16 gold every 10 seconds. Going through this for the CURRENT patch. Lets say I use GP10 quints and the gp10 mastery. That bumps me up to 21 gold/10 seconds.

The most CONSERVATIVE cost for AP is about 2k for 100 ap, taken from just buying amplifying tomes. (least gold effective way) so, how long will it take to get 2k gold? Not accounting for occasional CS or assists or buying a gp10 item, it would take about 15 minutes. This is in the old, gold-starved meta. In the new patch, we can estimate that supports will gain an additional 5500 gold per 40 minute game. Extrapolating here, we can estimate a ROUGH passive gold gain for the whole 40 minute period. it adds an additional ~2.3 gold every SECOND. That's more than doubling the current gold gain. Given my previous logic, we can say that the support could feasibly get 100 ap by 10 minutes, WITHOUT taking into account gold generation items.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hextech Kyubey

Senior Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silentcoyote View Post
Uh yeah it is ok. The difference between a fed Lissandra and Lissandra is gold. Not ratios.
I can't believe there are people *****ing about this.
Supports are not suppose to be burst machines. They can hurt, but they're primarily suppose to provide utility. Hence the CC scaling.
cept support annie can now do both thanks to these changes


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TheUltimate3

Senior Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by kitcat300 View Post
Morrelo, why do you bother posting when it is clear that no one even listens to your input? You try to make constructive arguments but then you just get one **** storm after another. I could never put up with this ****, how do you?
1) He wears chainmail underpants. He has survived fires far worse than this.

2) He (as the mouthpiece for the Dev Team) is either hilariously missing the point or the dev team is willingly ignorant of what the actual issue is.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Silentcoyote

Senior Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by If I were Jesus View Post
We're complaining about utility mages, not damage mages get with it.
Read what I quoted. The person said all mids should be able to be viable supports.
Get with it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AK47 Ho Chi Minh

Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post
Great - you should! I think it's our responsibility to be accountable here.

(2 days does not constitute data, just to remember). Give it a little time to settle, see the fallout, then adjust. Not a LOT of time, just a little.
What's this?!

Morello taking responsibility for his actions?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Minishmaster

Senior Member

11-20-2013

Okay, lets look at some facts.

-Supports are intentionally weaker than mages when given solo lane gold (otherwise they would be played mid)
-Certain mages are stronger than supports with no gold (certain mages are seeing play in botlane and pushing out traditional supports)
-Damage is intentionally stronger than CC* (this can be seen by the large number of true assassins and burst mages, and the small number of true tanks)
-Supports are receiving changes that will make their CC stronger, but have reduced damage.

In other words, unless the amount of CC being buffed is significantly higher than the amount of damage being nerfed, the changes to supports are an overall nerf.

*You are probably going to argue that CC is still very strong, and that is why you see champions like elise and ahri. I am going to remind you that ahri was matched by fizz, zed, and kassadin, and that elise is a magic damage jungler, like nautilus or amumu, except with less CC and more damage.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ntencti

Member

11-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post
This is the view I think is coloring analysis here - it's the "we've been in a bad space so long, you can't make any, non-power-increase changes." This is a ridiculous notion.

Tanks do awful damage, but have strong bases. They have utility and impact the game, scaling on durability and CDR. At worst, supports can do that (we see those builds on Dominion when they get gold, typically). We wanted to enhance build paths a bit though.

If you want to do big damage, then I actually don't understand why you are playing a support character.
You guys are the ones that enforce new metas and therefore all types of damage are considered, but we need to buff support damage in order to feel like that role fits in as a more fun and rewarding influence to the game with the damage shifts. Annie herself is damage based but still stuns well and offers alot in one package.