Regarding the Turret changes in 4.1

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

Aerothal

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

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcrushed View Post
Both Morello and Pwyff mentioned the 20 damage reduction lasts only for the first 8 minutes of the game, but they goofed for patch 4.1. We -want- it to be a set duration of time (and it will be in patch 4.2), but it's currently permanent.
LIES!!!
Morello doesn't goof and neither does Pwyff (whoever that is).
You are a treacherous heretic!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Drukyul

Senior Member

01-17-2014

If 2v1 is a problem, it should be countered with options for players, not with asymmetric map changes. Find some way to give champs that need to 1v2 a way to deal with it for the early game in the form of masteries, items, or summoner skills.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PallasAthens

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drukyul View Post
If 2v1 is a problem, it should be countered with options for players, not with asymmetric map changes. Find some way to give champs that need to 1v2 a way to deal with it for the early game in the form of masteries, items, or summoner skills.
Not a bad idea. Riot already has a mastery that adds +Def against having X enemies around you. Why not make a mastery or change it saying "Gain XX defenses when against more then one enemy champion, and no ally champion is around in an XXX radius, only active during the first XX minutes".

Problem solved. Suddenly if you send 2 against 1, not only is that 1 a huge threat, but he can easily take on both if they try to all in him.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

ForeverLaxx

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

Senior Member

01-17-2014

I'm waiting for them to apply another ham-fisted change when teams start doing 3/1/1 and pushing fast enough to make the absence of a dedicated jungler irrelevant since the team that loses their tower no longer has unmolested access to his jungle.

All the points about forcing the meta are extremely valid. The meta isn't about WHO you can pick to fill a lane, the meta is about HOW MANY you're "allowed" to put into a lane effectively. You never cared about this 2v1 issue back when that WAS the meta, where being able to handle a 2v1 was a REQUIREMENT for every top-laner. No changes to help them out were introduced, and then players discovered that jungling wasn't a total waste of time and managed to move away from what you apparently decided was suddenly now a problem on their own. Now that teams have decided that they can sacrifice the bottom lane when they can push top fast enough to offset the lack of dragon control, moving the meta to something else, it's suddenly become a problem?

Assassins become dominate mid: nerf them so mages can trade tickles with each other again.
Junglers are able to finally be everywhere at once, just as their team demands from them: way too many changes to the jungle to summarize here, since you've gone back and forth on rewarding ganks and rewarding farming to the point that any sweeping jungle changes are viewed with rolling eyes and heavy sighs.
Bottom lane gets invaded by mages pushed out due to assassins and realize they're not bad at supporting: neuter their support elements, or neuter their mage elements --- whichever lane YOU think they should go back to.

Have you guys ever thought about balancing the game around the idea of a role, and what role a lane should be for, rather than trying to force specific champions into specific lanes? Giving a champion all the tools they need to function in their little lane phase minigame has always led to major problems later, the most obvious of which would be Irelia.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mysnomer

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

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcrushed View Post
In accordance with some of our new patching policies, we at Riot would also like to roll out our overhauled health care plans. In the event of developing a repetitive stress injury while testing League, we have several thousand rolls of Ace bandage, ready to wrap that up immediately. Unfortunately, all the budget dedicated to these supplies means we can't afford ergonomic keyboards, mice, and other accessories. Should someone develop a cold from a long overnighter, we have plenty of cough syrup and other cough suppressants on hand. That way the employee can continue working unimpeded. We don't believe in antibiotics.

Well, this has been an enlightening look into the inner workings of League. Thank you, SolCrushed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverLaxx View Post
Snip
0_0 Marry me, pls <3


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mindworm Jim

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Okay. I managed to think of a possible solution that I don't hate:

1) All towers begin the game with a buff that reduces the damage they take from enemy champions.
2) The first team to slay the dragon removes this buff from the enemy team's towers.
3) At 15 minutes into the game (when Barons spawns), all towers lose the buff if they still have it.

Dragon control becomes super important early gme, because the first dragon grants a large advantage to the team that can claim it. If you want to play aggressive it lets you push towers down faster, and if you want to be more passive it makes it harder for your opponent to push against you (sin eh our towers would still have the buff and theirs would not). It also mirrors nicely with Baron, since Riot has commented that they want to change Baron buff to be more of a tower-killing buff, rather than a team fight buff.

The window before things even out again might be a little large, but that can be adjusted after testing.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

ForeverLaxx

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

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mysnomer View Post
0_0 Marry me, pls <3
To fall this far is a sad thing to behold. I don't even know you.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sorioku

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by PallasAthens View Post
Not a bad idea. Riot already has a mastery that adds +Def against having X enemies around you. Why not make a mastery or change it saying "Gain XX defenses when against more then one enemy champion, and no ally champion is around in an XXX radius, only active during the first XX minutes".

Problem solved. Suddenly if you send 2 against 1, not only is that 1 a huge threat, but he can easily take on both if they try to all in him.
But if they don't send a 2v1, then that mastery is useless. It wouldn't be best to make super conditional masteries.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LoveSparkle

Senior Member

01-17-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcrushed View Post
We feel it opens up the meta, at least in a more interesting way. Now you have to weigh pros and cons when you are initiating a lane swap and your strategy will be different from your oppoenent's teams.
Oh lookie someone from Live Balance. We have much to discuss.

But on this topic: Lane Swapping only occurs in very high diamond in solo queue and in ranked 5s / competitive play.

This IS enforcing the meta on 99.99% of the rest of the league.

--

When you focus on balance for the top .01% you are gonna mess up bad.

See: Every rework as a misnomer for "Live Balance and Champion Design messed up".

--

Truth, the pride of the LB and CD teams get in the way. You change something and it has consequences. Then instead of realizing you made a mistake, you nerf everything else around it. The champions that play support now Like Galio and Annie in competitive play are proof traditional supports such as Janna, Lulu, Nami (hint this is why Annie went bot) were over-nerfed by the philosophy that CC and utility is toxic game play.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PallasAthens

Senior Member

01-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorioku View Post
But if they don't send a 2v1, then that mastery is useless. It wouldn't be best to make super conditional masteries.
Tack it on to the final defense mastery. Since it won't be activated if you don't go 2v1, it could be 'While this passive is active, the other passive is deactivated.' So after the XX time of what should be the laning phase is over, the bonus stats get deactivated and the regular passive comes up.

Not that difficult. No different from the tower gaining a buff.

The thing is though, Riot acts as this tower buff will 'solve' the 2v1 issue, but you don't 2v1 to take down the tower, you do it to get their solo laner behind and to kill/tower dive him. That's still going to exist.