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


@Riot Bounty Hunter vs Conservation

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

Teldryn

Senior Member

12-13-2013

You recently removed the bounty hunter passive, replacing it with conservation on two the the more offensive jungle items.

While I love the conservation passive, on certain champions such has Jarvan IV, I found the extra gold from assists due to bounty hunter to be an excellent choice.

I agree that sometimes it is too risky to put on a core item, which is why I believe you should change it such that players can choose when they buy, whether to get the conservation passive or the bounty hunter passive.

If you are behind, or want to play safe, you can get the core jungle item you want with conservation. If you are feeling risky or are ahead, you might go with bounty hunter.

Both are good, but it's a shame to remove bounty hunter altogether.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TecToNiiC

Senior Member

12-13-2013

that would be a really cool idea similar to how when you go to upgrade yellow trinket for the last time you can pick between the two options or even making the spirit jungle items cost slightly less at their final stage and treat the bounty hunter/conservation as a sort of enchantment.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Krosan

Senior Member

12-13-2013

Conservation was just better in most circumstances. Carry junglers are already a bit of a feast-or-famine gamble; to have their bonus gold item be one that does little for them if they're not carrying off successful ganks was a bit much.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kholdstare13

Senior Member

12-13-2013

Bounty Hunter made them viable on the Howling Abyss because you were basically guaranteed at least 20 stacks on it to offset the low stats and pitiful passive true damage on SotEL and make it fairly cost effective. Having it gone seems fine, get champions into their real builds sooner instead of building junk for income that needed time to pay back off.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elphrihaim

Senior Member

12-14-2013

I just wish that you could have more than 80 stacks of Conservation (maybe 120). Currently I get stacks so fast that I clear two camps (to reset conservation to 0)... and I already have 10-20 once we group up, and 40-50 when we start poking.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Krosan

Senior Member

12-14-2013

Quote:
Elphrihaim:
I just wish that you could have more than 80 stacks of Conservation (maybe 120). Currently I get stacks so fast that I clear two camps (to reset conservation to 0)... and I already have 10-20 once we group up, and 40-50 when we start poking.


80 is about right. If the Conservation cap is too high, it becomes less about helping to offset the cost of ganking, and instead just funds you to continually roam for long periods of time, then clear a few camps to reset the Conservation passive before resuming the roam.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TheRealGSpot

Junior Member

12-14-2013

Honestly this is just another attempt by Riot to make games go longer by making farming with conservation stacks more lucrative than constant ganks. This passive change is meant to make the frequency of ganks go down, making laning phase last longer due to decreased map pressure. For example, I main Hecarim who is supposed to be a gank-heavy jungler, and the Bounty Hunter passive went well with that plan since most of the time I would get a kill or assist or otherwise pressure a lane and get some tower damage. The jungle farming I would do in the meantime was NOT the main source of income in my games, even though my CS was high most games, that was due to lane taxing or otherwise pushing lanes out after laning phase ended. Also, in a late game scenario where lanes are pushed, whether to your base or the enemy's, jungle creeps are going to be farmed by either the enemy team or yours while in the meantime you're gaining Conservation stacks that you cant use, essentially wasting gold. On the other hand, having Bounty Hunter would prevent me passively losing gold due to lost stacks while also giving me potential gold should a team fight happen. While you might argue that having Bounty Hunter and missing out on kills/assists also wastes the passive's gold, that is the risk that a carry jungler, that would presumably build one of the offensive spirit items, makes when they pick that champion.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The5lacker

Senior Member

12-14-2013

Quote:
Kholdstare13:
Bounty Hunter made them viable on the Howling Abyss because you were basically guaranteed at least 20 stacks on it to offset the low stats and pitiful passive true damage on SotEL and make it fairly cost effective. Having it gone seems fine, get champions into their real builds sooner instead of building junk for income that needed time to pay back off.

If you're buying a jungling item on a map with no jungle, perhaps you might be going against the intents of Riot and therefor shouldn't be catered to?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kholdstare13

Senior Member

12-14-2013

Quote:
The5lacker:
If you're buying a jungling item on a map with no jungle, perhaps you might be going against the intents of Riot and therefor shouldn't be catered to?

Did you read my comment? I said I'm glad it's **** now. The problem is, Riot made a conscious decision to add those items to HA. Telling them to just get rid of them again might cause a bit of a fuss.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Krosan

Senior Member

12-14-2013

Quote:
TheRealGSpot:
Honestly this is just another attempt by Riot to make games go longer


Stopped reading there, as should anyone else. All their devs have been pretty upfront and clear that affecting game length isn't an intention and that it'll be considered an issue if the changes result in game lengths increasing significantly.


1