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


This 6300 IP Bull**** Needs To Stop

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DeceivingNShady

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
Dabba:
So cute. I just want to pat you on your little head, give you a much needed hug and tell you its ok.


and now you snapped


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dabba

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Woot new page!

450: 7 champs
1350: 18 champs
3150: 26 champs
4800: 3 champs
6300: 22 champs

Quote:
Zealot644:
Apparently champions in a multitude of price ranges is impossible.


Not only possible, it is exactly what we have!

So of the 76 champs, 51 of them (67%) are at the mid range IP price or cheaper. 25 (33%) of them are above the median price. Seems like a pretty darn good mix to me. What were we complaining about again?

Just going to post this on every page from now on when this thread gets bumped. It puts the lie to the OP. Balanced ip costs are balanced. Go ahead haters, downvote truth. I love it. I got math on my side, come at me bros.

Quote:
Sefam:
The steady increase of exclusively 6300 IP champions. Most of the champions from the mid range IP or lower are the 40 first champions. Everything else except Poppy is 3150 and above.


Ok, but that has nothing to do with Riots promise of a balanced range of IP costs among champions other than they were following through on their promise, since before the release of a line of 6300 champs the balance was heavily skewed toward the lower price range. Riot never made any promise regarding new champion releases, they simply promised a balanced range of champion costs, and they have delivered.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gambuto

Senior Member

05-14-2011

meeh post is goin oftopic

cya!!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dabba

Senior Member

05-14-2011

They have no choice but to go off topic. I so completely obliterated the original post with math and logic they need to resort to playground antics and name calling.

That might work on their little friends, but all it will get from the grown ups is an eye roll.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Liath

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
DeceivingNShady:
Of course you bring up one exception that is not true for everyone. And then your last remark is a psychological self projection.....



make that two psychological self projections. you are the one spamming every page




You're a bad troll. No cookie for you.


OP, you're wrong, there're 2 pages of 6300, 3 pages of 48-3150, and 2 pages of 1350-450 champions.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Digivolve

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Roar


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KonFewShuN

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
Dabba:
Woot new page!

450: 7 champs
1350: 18 champs
3150: 26 champs
4800: 3 champs
6300: 22 champs



Not only possible, it is exactly what we have!

So of the 76 champs, 51 of them (67%) are at the mid range IP price or cheaper. 25 (33%) of them are above the median price. Seems like a pretty darn good mix to me. What were we complaining about again?Just going to post this on every page from now on when this thread gets bumped. It puts the lie to the OP. Balanced ip costs are balanced. Go ahead haters, downvote truth. I love it. I got math on my side, come at me bros.



Ok, but that has nothing to do with Riots promise of a balanced range of IP costs among champions other than they were following through on their promise, since before the release of a line of 6300 champs the balance was heavily skewed toward the lower price range. Riot never made any promise regarding new champion releases, they simply promised a balanced range of champion costs, and they have delivered.


Wait- 67% and 33% is balanced?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dabba

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
KonFewShuN:
Wait- 67% and 33% is balanced?


33% are below the median. 34% are at the median. 33% are above median. Perfectly balanced.

Sorry basic math was confusing you.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
KonFewShuN:
See, heres the problem with me right now.

I have over 13K of IP to spend, and id like to buy new champs, but seeing as a good 40% or so are 6.3K IP. I will not buy them, simply because afer buying a 6.3k champ, that leaves me with not nearly enough IP for a full rune build for that particular champ.


So save up more IP. What's the problem?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Beatus

Member

05-14-2011

Quote:
Sefam:
I believe the promise concerned future releases. Correct me if I'm wrong.



Only marketing can answer these questions. Phreak can't come in and say "lol it'l be okay".

And you know how much marketing has transparency with the community compared to the other departments.


Yes, they're even worse than the other departments.

@Trolls: I'd like to thank you for bumping this thread. Love you.