: First of all, okay, the shield bugged... Second, Nidalee Q is not considered auto-atack by Teemo blind, its considered an ability
Nidalee's human Q spear dealing damage when Sivir use her spell shield is a bug, Nidalee's cougar Q dealing damage whilst under Teemo's blind is also a bug, because Nidalee's cougar Q is an enhanced auto attack.
Rouwhorst (EUW)
: Nidalee Q is considered an enhanced basic attack, it should miss when blinded. I checked this quickly in practise mode as Teemo, the attack missed. The [wiki](http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Nidalee) confirms this too.
Human Q isn't. Cougar Q is.
: I didn't understand a single thing about your maths but why are you using %? Lethality is flat armor pen, it scales with lv but still, what scales with level is a bonus flat armor pen you get. Lethality is x base armor ignored + y armor that scales with lv.
Don't think you should be the one correcting him if you don't know what he is talking about. The formula he was using is the formula that calculates damage reduction in correspondence with the amount of armor. The formula is correct.
CryGods (EUW)
: Yo Riot, dafak is wrong with your Support page?!
The website is working for me. I guess it's back to normal again.
: What does that bring to you if you die after 3 Auto atacks ?
This won't happen unless Rammus is extremely fed and Vayne is extremely behind.
Evanitis (EUNE)
: I only have a few. {{champion:107}} - Kitty {{champion:103}} - Kitty {{champion:75}} - Doggie {{champion:19}} - Doggie Every yordle - Squirrel
How could you forget this kitty {{champion:76}} ?
Febos (EUW)
: I remember when I first got to 18... back in the old days, 1937. That was the good life. I got a cookie for you {{item:2009}}
You are 97 years old?
Blu4fun (EUNE)
: Game development
How are you going to incorporate VR into the game without screwing long-range abilities/items that exist? Not to mention how bad the camera angles would be for the players. How are you going to peel for your teammates while you are also running away from the enemy team and the camera is facing the opposite side of the enemy team? How do you aim to legitimately peel? What about map control? How do you simultaneously watch one side of the map while you and your champion are on the another side of the map? You have better things to do with VR than traditional MOBAs like League of Legends.
Silisa (EUNE)
: > Less toxicity Has a lot to do with the Automated Punishment system. Since this system is the one dealing with negative behavior, and not the Dynamic Q. > No limitations on the number of premade groups. Fair enough. And one of the reasons we hate it.
> [{quoted}](name=Silisa,realm=EUNE,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=kJEAAhGQ,comment-id=000700010000,timestamp=2016-06-03T09:20:48.442+0000) > > Has a lot to do with the Automated Punishment system. Since this system is the one dealing with negative behavior, and not the Dynamic Q. I think it's the combination of both more than just Automated Punishment System. Playing with friends often means less frustration, which can properly translate to less toxicity.
: I find it very hard to believe. We know for a fact that the game is declining (lots of people are quitting), so I dont really trust it when Mr Tons of damage makes such a statement. Heck, I dont trust Riot anymore in general.
> [{quoted}](name=Wolf In Tux,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=kJEAAhGQ,comment-id=000800000001,timestamp=2016-06-02T17:57:29.235+0000) > > I find it very hard to believe. We know for a fact that the game is declining (lots of people are quitting), **according to my anecdotal experience**, so I dont really trust it when Mr Tons of damage makes such a statement. Heck, I dont trust Riot anymore in general. Ftfy. Out of how many percent of total active players people are quitting? Do you have any statistical data proving A LOT OF people (like 15% of active players or more) are quitting LOL? Can you prove that the number of active players in total is declining (the number of quitting players > the number of new players)? If not, what's so hard to believe that more people play ranked than before? I guess the more important question is: why would they want to jeopardize their game by making decisions that no one (or a few players) in the League community wants?
Gajoob (EUW)
: ***
LOL, I never dismiss the people who are disagreeing with Riot's stance on Dynamic Queue. And I never even hypothesized anything, like you perceived as such. I am just disagreeing with your opinions regarding people's stance on Dynamic Queue. You think a majority of people dislike Dynamic Queue and you perceive it as fact. That's what I disagree on. I even mentioned in my post that > I am not saying it's definite that the majority supports/hates Dynamic Queue (I support Dynamic Queue but I can see why people hate it) but there is no evidence proving either of these speculations. If you have read, you can clearly tell I do not speculate on this matter because of insufficient data, but your insistence on making me seem like I am hypothesizing or speculating something is infuriating to me. The only one that is speculating in this particular comment chain is you, lol. I am just saying there must be reasons why Riot does not ditch Dynamic Queue even though it seems that the vocal crowd is unsupportive, which neither of us can even explain properly. I tried to quote on Phreak's Reddit post on why Riot insists on keeping Dynamic Queue, and yet you tried to dismiss with your speculations. Funny how you said my comments are guesswork and speculations when 90% of your comments here consist of even more guesswork.
Gajoob (EUW)
: ***
I read the link you mentioned (someone sent me the same Reddit link before) and there are no sources on some of the data on DOTA 2 (to be more specific, I am talking about total active playerbase of DOTA 2 in 2014). Even the sources are questionable. How could a general manager of an esports team know that much about the player base when neither Valve nor Riot disclosed anything about the player base in 2015? Where did the data he spoke of come from? The Steam Chart of 2015 showed drastic differences on the statistics compared to what VG manager said. Why was that? Unless Valve or Riot announced their statistics, there is simply no reason to believe what a random Redditor said.
SloPro11 (EUNE)
: Can you give me a single reson why you prefer dynamic q over soloq
Less toxicity (at least anecdotally). No limitations on the number of premade groups. Good enough reasons for you?
Gajoob (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Gajoob,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=kJEAAhGQ,comment-id=00080000000000000000,timestamp=2016-06-02T15:16:38.946+0000) > > What is proven is they haven't said anything. So if anything, we can't even consider them in the equation. It's like a vote at the election. Are we supposed to consider all the people that didn't vote? No, we can't. Because they didn't vote. They didn't say anything so we don't know. All we can do is look at the people who DID vote. > > I absolutely agree with you. People don't outright say they support something as there's no need to. But this isn't an excuse. If nobody is saying "we agree," then how do we know people agree with it? If all people are saying is they don't want it, then doesn't that say something? You can't just dismiss the people vocally saying they disagree with something on the basis of, "Well everyone else probably agrees, but they aren't saying anything because they don't need to." Because where's the evidence? > > I think you're being very on-high about this. If you could step down from your podium for a moment, please. > > It's quite easy to look at the stats and come to a conclusion. I am seeing people complain about it. I am not seeing people agree with it. Just because the human psyche plays into a factor that prevents people from saying otherwise is not an excuse you can pull. As it stands: > > There is very little evidence that people support Dynamic Queue. > Inversely, there is a TON of evidence that people are against it. > > I'm dealing with the facts here. What you're dealing with is pseudo-speculation and guesses. That's YOUR hypothesis. Guesswork. And that's not a foundation to build an argument on. The only way you can objectively look into this matter and get into valid conclusions is using one or more of statistical sampling methods. I am not going to go into details of which sampling method(s) is/are the best and feasible for this particular issue as I do not have enough information regarding the player base. However, analysing the opinions of Youtube/Reddit/Boards communities only is problematic and proves that you are biased as it's very clear that not every member of the League of Legends community engages in these sub-communities and like I said before, supporters are less likely to be vocal. Your posts are full of sampling bias, aka analysing things in a way that some members of the same characteristics of an intended population are more included than other members of the same population. You only see the vocal minority whining about Dynamic Queue without analysing players that are supporting Dynamic Queue properly and equally. Like I said, perception is harmful in objective analysis. I am not saying it's definite that the majority supports/hates Dynamic Queue (I support Dynamic Queue but I can see why people hate it) but there is no evidence proving either of these speculations. So just get off of your high horse and look into this matter objectively. Riot has most of the available statistics in their hands and it's clear that they reckon Dynamic Queue is not detrimental to their finance. Who are you, without any available and **valid ** statistical data at hand, to say otherwise?
Gajoob (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Gajoob,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=kJEAAhGQ,comment-id=000800000000,timestamp=2016-06-02T14:51:36.029+0000) > > I think Riot will continue to do what they think is best for the community regardless of what the community desires. That's my two pence. And just because more people are playing Dynamic Queue does not mean to say they are satisfied with it. If anything, that correlates, as the previous split down the middle - between SoloQ and teamranked - has merged together. > > The like to dislike ratio proves that the minority of people who actually bothered to show their opinion - 20,000 of the 350,000 views, mind - that most people disagree. > > It doesn't equate to agreeing with something either. Indifference in itself is just that. It's neither agreeing or disagreeing. > > That is to say: > > 5% agree > 15% disagree > 80% don't care > > Ergo: everybody loves dynamic queue? > > That doesn't make sense. The problem with your hypothesis is that you think the silent majority are all indifferent regarding Dynamic Queue, which is not yet proven. Do you know why there is not a single "I support Dynamic Queue" posts on Reddit or Boards (or if there are any, they are immediately downvoted to oblivion)? The supporters don't bother writing these posts for 2 reasons: 1. They will just get downvoted by the angry mobs of protesters on Reddit and the Boards and no meaningful discussions can take place, and 2. It's common sense in terms of psychology that people will complain more about a product than praising it on an Internet forum. The ratio of the number of complimenting threads to the number of whining threads is ridiculously low. If people are satisfied with something, they are less likely to talk about it on the Internet. With these 2 reasons, it's not hard to see why you think Dynamic Queue is unpopular with the majority. Perception blinds people and adversely affects objectivity and it's especially true here.
Gajoob (EUW)
: ***
If the majority of the community prefers Solo Queue over Dynamic Queue, do you think Riot will continue to alienate the majority of the community and insist on maintaining Dynamic Queue? Phreak has talked about it in Reddit; one of the reasons they are keeping Dynamic Queue is that more people are playing ranked games than previous years, which translate to people enjoying Dynamic Queue more than Solo Queue. The like to dislike ratio only proves to me that the vocal minority are dissatisfied with Dynamic Queue. If there are a million players disliking this video, I may give your hypothesis some credit. Unfortunately for you, it's not. ##Also being silent or indifferent about something doesn't equate to disliking or hating on something.
: And now imagine AD malzahar with that abomination. Get an IE, that thing and his Voidlings crit for 2k
YXY (EUW)
: can i climb by playing only support ?
I climbed from Silver V to Gold V with games that mostly consist of me supporting, so yes, it is possible as long as you try. You can carry as a support main you know.
Agidyne (EUW)
: You know, being Diamond isn't as great as it sounds.
>One guy said I was wrong and that he mained support Braum and he could stop Sions ult with his own Ult. >I asked if he wasn't confusing his Ult with his Shield, but the guy sweared on his freaking mom what he was sying is true and that Braums ult stopped Sions ult. >I simply told him that was impossible and that if it ever happened was due to a bug or something of that sort. Chances are Sion stopped his ultimate by re-casting it and Braum's ultimate hit him after, or Braum body blocked and stopped Sion's ultimate, resulting him to step into Braum's ultimate/get knocked up by Braum's ultimate, depending on the timing of Braum's ultimate. That aside, your remark regarding demanding him to talk to you again when he gets out of Bronze IV is a bit snarky. If I were you I would just remain silent and let them argue, even when I was right somehow, because sometimes ignorance is not something outsiders can eliminate. Ignorant and stubborn people have to learn the hard way.
: Another one that claims Vladimir can deal with Riven? Either i am doing something very wrong or you dont play Vladimir :(
If you see her coming with E or the third Q, pool out of her. Her dashes are one of the shortest dashes in League of Legends, and Vladimir's W is a speed boost and a slow basically. Her Q will either go on cooldown before she can land her third Q on you, or she will use it abruptly because some Riven "mains" are impatient. Even if she uses her E > W combo on you, she can't instantly use her third Q knockup either because there is a delay between each cast of Q and she needs to cast her Q twice before she can land a knockup. Vladimir's sustain easily outclasses Riven as well, so it's more favorable for Vladimir to duel against Riven (with Will of the Ancients, it's even better. The powerspike is too strong) given that both of them are of equal skill level. If your W is on cooldown, stay away from her and farm with your ranged auto attacks and spells. I am in fact a Vladimir main (with Level 5 Mastery), none of the Rivens I met could beat me in 1 vs 1 situations, unless they called in their beloved junglers/roaming mid laners.
Stekeltje (EUW)
: If you think the damage should be the same, then I think you either have a misconception of balance or you want all champions to have the same skill set. After all, you seem to want the damage to be the same no matter the risks or disadvantages. That's just not what balance is. To balance something, one has to sacrifice in order to gain benefits elsewhere. That means that if a champion has a total points of 10 to distribute in defense and offense, it will always have a total of 10 points, regardless how the points are spent. So if a champion has 10 points in offense and 0 points in defense, it means the damage is by far higher than a champion focused on defense. This brings back to my earlier point, damage should not be the same. This is what balance is. That being said, the strengths and weaknesses aren't as simple as numbers from 1 to 10 which is probably why Riot has a whole team trying to balance things out. Now in reaction to your points, I think all you have done is pointing out the abilities of Riven and saying how strong / overpowered they are. Which means it's really just an opinion if it's not based on anything. I mean, sure Riven has 3 dashes at lvl 1, all doing damage and giving her a knock up at the end and triggering her passive. But what does this really say about being overpowered? To be honest, I wouldn't know what to think when looking to your first point. All it says is it does something and ending with a conclusion that it's unfair / overloaded and brutally unbalanced. Unfair / overloaded and unbalanced compared to what? Let me try to compare it to Lulu: Level 1 Riven with Q using 21/9/0 masteries and 15 ad / 9 armor / 12 mr runes. This is a very common start for Riven. Usually people would use CDR runes instead of the mr runes, but I wanted to keep it simple. The starting stats for Riven will be a total of 77 attack damage, 54 base and 23 bonus attack damage (even though the tooltip in game says +22). How does this reflect to the starting power of Riven with Q? Broken Wings: 10 damage + 40% bonus attack damage per use (30 + 120% bonus attack damage in total) 250 range per use (750 in total) 13 seconds cooldown A full use of her Q would give her 30 + 28 damage in **total**. A total of 58 damage, not taking armor in consideration. However, Lulu has a range of 550 and it's very unlikely the first 2 Q's would even hit Lulu. Let's presume Lulu is equally skilled and stays at max range to farm / harass. Riven would need to use her Q twice before reaching Lulu which drops the damage down to: 19 damage. She does however have 3 stacks stored for her passive. Passive bonus at level 1: 20% attack damage The passive bonus at level 1 for Riven is 15 attack damage. Even though I mentioned Lulu to be equally skilled, she somehow still takes on 3 full auto attack hits of Riven. That would be 3 times 77 + 15 which comes down to 276 damage in total. Level 1 Lulu with Q using 21/0/9 masteries and 27 ap / 9 armor / 8 magic pen runes. I just randomly searched a build in pro builds. The other builds doesn't differ from this one too much and since this is more directed towards Riven, it seems fair. The starting stats for Lulu will be 46 ad and 34 ap. Glitterlance: 80 damage + 50% ap 925 range 7 seconds cooldown Each use of her Q does 80 + 17. A total of 97 damage, the armor penetration hasn't been taken into consideration as well as the magic resistance. A common use of Glitterlance is kiting their enemies with it, enabling her to use her Glitterlance a few times before they reaches her. Here I assume Riven is at approximately 750 range before she starts her Q. Notice, Lulu could have hit Riven already by the time she can even use her Q. Passive bonus at level 1: 9 damage + 15% ap For each basic attack, her faerie adds 14 extra damage to the basic attacks. After Riven used her first Q, she comes into range for Lulu to attack Riven with her basic attacks (range 550), which does 60 damage in total to Riven. Showdown: Now that Riven has reached Lulu, let's assume they're both fighting till the death. Lulu has 553 hp and Riven 558. At this point Lulu has taken 19 damage from Broken Wings and Riven has taken Glitterlance head-on for a total of 97 + one basic attack of 60 damage. After 7 seconds (cooldown of Glitterlance) both Lulu and Riven has done 4 basic attacks (same attack speed). Total damage done by Lulu: 397. Total damage done by Riven: 372. Lulu fires another Glitterlance which brings the total damage to 469 damage done by Lulu. While Broken Wings is still on cooldown, they both hit each other for another 3 more times. Total damage done by Lulu: 649. Total damage done by Riven: 603. This results in both of them dying, while this situation is heavily in favor towards Lulu. After all, she has just been standing still taking all hits head-on (except the first Q's). She didn't fire Glitterlance at max range (or poke) nor did she kite at all. Also the knock up haven't been mentioned because even without the knock up, Lulu's auto attack wouldn't have been ready after using it before. **TL;DR** Unfortunately this post has become rather long so I'll just stick to your first point. So to answer your first point: > At level 1, she has essentially three free spells that give her mobility and damage, plus up to 3 charges of a basic attack steroid. Let me make it clear, Riven gets 3 dashes that deal decent damage, including a knock-up crowd control and basic attack steroid charges, at level 1, for free. Can you see how this is a bit unfair? This is a clear first case of Riven being overloaded, as well as brutally unbalanced, considering how she gains 4 mechanics (Dash, Damage, CC and Damage Steroid) from a single skill. No, I don't think it's a bit unfair and as you can see all the things you've mentioned doesn't even enable her to win against Lulu. But this is besides my point. You can't just sum up all the abilities and saying they're overpowered. Now I know Lulu isn't exactly easy for Riven, but that's exactly why there are counterplays for certain champions.
When people talk about champion balance, they often forget that it is absolutely necessary to compare a champion's weaknesses with his/her strengths and see if strengths offset against weaknesses or not. Most people either keep babbling about a champion's strengths and claim that it is overpowered/broken or a champion's weaknesses and then claim that a champion is underpowered. Both are wrong approaches to discuss champion balance. And that's why in my response to his post I mention Riven's weaknesses and compare it with Riven's strengths and conclude that Riven isn't all that overpowered.
: If it is any consolation, she is being reworked. She now has a reworked passive and she actually has to basic attack champions instead of just unleashing her abilities and ult. Basically, after using an ability once, if she auto-attacks a champion, she gains 20 Edge. She has to stack this and at 100 Edge, she gains the bonus damage. No more jumping around, stun and windslash to go 1v5 and get a pentakill. Hopefully this will allow you to sleep a bit more peacefully than the thought of your mother raising you up like a pig for slaughter in order to perform a satanic ritual when you come of age and chowing down on your entrails after she chopped off your testicles and offered them to our Almighty Lucifer. Edit: Please ignore this comment. The rework has been revoked and is a month old thing. {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-rainbows}}
This Riven rework was actually revoked long ago. While Riven rework may come back, it's pretty clear this is not the final product of the rework.
: If it meant balance, then yes, same damage would be good. Riven does not have as many risks as you think. Early game she has a massively unfair damage advantage with next to no champions having the needed tank at this stage to cope. Later on, she will have undoubted bought armor penetration among the usual AD, which for some reason is allowed to afford her both damage *and* a high scaling shield. What this then means is that she has massive damage (as well as armor shred) plus the ability to be uncatchable when she wants to get away. Riven in game is overpowered because; 1. At level 1, she has essentially **three** free spells that give her mobility and damage, plus up to 3 charges of a basic attack steroid. Let me make it clear, **Riven gets 3 dashes that deal decent damage, including a knock-up crowd control and basic attack steroid charges, at level 1, for free**. Can you see how this is a bit unfair? This is a clear first case of Riven being overloaded, as well as brutally unbalanced, considering how she gains 4 mechanics (Dash, Damage, CC and Damage Steroid) from a single skill. 2. At level 2 and 3, she gains more crowd control in the form of an AoE stun, and another dash with a shield this time. Many Riven players say that the AoE is small, and think that is a valid excuse but the problem is that Riven has 4 dashes to get on top of you and/or you team and stun you. Why should someone with so much damage (from her abilities, passive and subsequent auto attacks) have so much crowd control and the mobility to land it? It surely is not because she is squishy, because she has a readily available shield that fully scales with her **attack damage**. Early game, no one has the damage to pop the shield effectively, while later on, the shield is just far too big coupled with the damage she deals out. 3. At level 6, she gains another attack damage steroid as well as an AoE execute. Her abilities also gain more range, meaning getting away from her is even more difficult. Riven's ultimate is the reason why another Riven Player excuse about "if she uses her abilities to get to you then she is weaker" does not justify anything. The damage from her ultimate on first cast, plus the damage and stun from Ki Burst, plus the passive charges from dashing in, plus the second cast ultimate execute means that she still does a shed load of damage. Riven just has too many benefits, with too few weaknesses that are also too weak to raise an argument with. She has no resource to manage, and managing cooldowns is as hard as remembering to breath. She gains a damage advantage throughout the game with her passive charges, as well as her high scaling abilities. Within a single ability she gains 3 dashes, 1 knock-up and AoE Damage in each instance. She also has another crowd control in Ki Burst, and another dash in Valor. She also gains a **100% AD Scaling** shield with the same skill, which means that you don't need to worry so much about armor or magic resist, as you are rewarded defensively for just building offensive items. So; Riven doesn't have to worry about mana. She doesn't have to worry about cooldowns. She doesn't have to worry about defense due to her shield. She has free mobility with her dashes. She has 2 instances of easy-to-land AoE Crowd Control. She has AD steroids in her passive and her ultimate. She has an AoE execute with her ultimate. She has strong scaling of 1 stat (AD) throughout her kit. Riven has too much damage, mobility, defense and crowd control. Also in the case of Huni it would be because Smeb was that much more skilful than him. You really have to appreciate the skill and thought Smeb had to put into his game to beat such an easily fed champion such as Riven.
**Her E actually scales with 100% bonus AD, not total AD. There is a huge difference between these 2.** Regardless, Riven is overloaded, I have to agree. Her passive is actually a hidden power because she is not required to land her abilities to get bonus physical damage from it. Her 4 dashes are painful but pretty telegraphic, that you can actually see it coming unless she hides in an unwarded bush, and her ultimate is hard to miss despite the nerf on missile speed. However, if you think an average Riven can easily be fed, you are dead wrong. Her cooldowns are pretty high early game and if you look at her health regeneration, you will realise she has one of the lowest health regeneration. Once you win a trade against her early game when she has no lifesteal, you pretty much can kill her or push her out of lane. Her cooldown is considerably high without CDR (even with CDR runes there is actually a huge window for you to poke her or out-trade her due to her high CD early game. She legitimately needs Brutalizer to spam her abilities). Another weakness is the lack of ranged pokes pre-6. You can pretty much figure out how much she can get dumpstered by Vladimir or remotely anyone that has ranged pokes and can exploit her lack of ranged pokes pre-6. Her damage is insane in the right hands, but her damage pretty much relies on her enemy laner messing up and/or the application of auto attack cancellation and right combos, which I can assure you that you will mess up pretty badly as a Riven if you don't play Riven at all. Spamming the abilities doesn't give her insane damage. Using abilities and auto attacking in between the abilities do. She needs a kit rework to remove her hidden power in her passive so as to actually reward her for landing her abilities. Additionally, she needs either a resource that can gate her use of abilities or a nerf on her cooldowns. However, she is far from overpowered. Yes she is very strong (in the hands of Riven mains), but she has a lot of counterplay. Play her in ranked for 10 times and see if you can easily get fed just by spamming abilities.
Wukongz (EUNE)
: ***
100% **bonus** AD. Ftfy. Yeah the kit is pretty overloaded and she has one substantial problem of getting free statistics from her passive and her ultimate. Her passive needs a complete rework so that good Rivens are rewarded for using the right combos (not just spamming abilities) and getting free statistics. Lee Sin is pretty much a pain to the ass. He has counterplay but good Lee Sins always exploit his 2 gapclosers (one of which you cannot dodge) and kick you into his team. He is just as hard to play as Riven but he has so much utility that even if his damage kinda falls off late game (except for his ultimate, which never falls off because he can use it to kick enemy tank into enemy carries to instaburst them), he still has the ability to actually peel for his team and shield his teammates. Overall, his disadvantages are completely overshadowed by his utility and advantages, making good Lee Sins pain in the ass to play against.
JQKAndrei (EUW)
: I'm not a riven hater at all, I just said that the discussion between you and that guy is pointless because he ignores the experience of someone that actually plays the champ (you), and pretends to know stuff based on assumptions. Look at my match history, I'm trying my hardest to learn how to play Riven and I believe she's one of the hardest champions to play. She's actually the only champion that made me go in a custom game multiple times to practice her combos. And I still don't get them right.
Oh sorry, I misunderstood your previous post. My apologies.
Hrki (EUNE)
: 2/3 items is enough for her to instakill someone. She has way too much free stats. Passive part of ult, and her passive. Tbh it's pointless discussing with a main cause you're always ignorant and defending your freelo. Enjoy it while you can.
2-3 (full) items require her to farm at least for 10 minutes straight without missing a whole bunch of cs and probably needs a few kills and assists to help if she does miss some CS. If she does successfully do that, it's your fault for not zoning her in early game when you can, since her weakness is no ranged poke pre-6, and having the lowest health regeneration. Her cooldown is considerably high without any CDR items/a moderate amount of CDR runes. Tbh, it's pointless discussing with a Riven hater who probably doesn't have much game knowledge and experience and then goes on a spiral argument just because he got wrecked by Rivens and does not know how to actually counter her. Hmm, sounds familiar to you?
Hrki (EUNE)
: Yea, she gets free AD when she uses any spell.
Read Riven's passive again: >Riven's blade gains a charge for 5 seconds every time she casts an ability, stacking up to 3 times. Each of her basic attacks consumes an available charge to deal 20 / 25 / 30 / 35 / 40 / 45 / 50% AD bonus physical damage. TL;DR Her basic attacks gain bonus physical damage that can stack up to 3 times whenever she uses a spell. She doesn't gain free AD. If she got free AD per spell cast her spells would be much more powerful, if not overpowered. Fortunately that is not the case at all.
Hrki (EUNE)
: Neither Xin nor Irelia can kill anyone in 1 second unless they're extremely fed and full AD (which doesn't happen in 90% of the matches). Neither their dashes are enough to get to the carry without burning a flash. Also Irelia doesn't have AOE CC, which allows the enemy team to CC her before she can do anything. Riven CCs everyone in decent AOE rendering them useless for enough time to do a small combo. Any other examples.
>Neither Xin nor Irelia can kill anyone in 1 second (...) I think I can ignore the rest of your paragraph because you have clearly no idea what the power curve of Riven is. Unless Riven is **EXTREMELY** fed (going 5/0 or something like that) in early game, there is no way she can burst someone within a second. Try again when you have a concise idea what Riven's kit exactly is.
Hrki (EUNE)
: Give me examples.
I don't have to. All assassins are able to do their job of flash > combo > kill as long as they have decent farm early game. Bruisers may be harder since they are a combination of DPS and tankiness, but some bruisers have assassin quality, like Irelia, Xin Zhao, etc... Some of these champions don't even need flash, just the dashes in their kit, and they can kill any squishy carries with the right combos and positioning.
Hrki (EUNE)
: Who else can flash>kill?
Kauski (EUNE)
: riven winrate spikin from 50% to 63% on master tier, so a skilled riven facerolls everyone down. being hard to play champ doesnt mean it should be overpowered. flash combos are too easy to do and squishies are good as dead. i wonder why nobody QQ about most marksman champs on forums about how op they are, oh wait its only vayne that can actually put a fight against these new retartedly designed hard to counterplay champs.
>flash combos are too easy to do and squishies are good as dead. Apply to pretty much every other assassin/some other bruisers... What exactly are you whining about?
Kauski (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Maazinea,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U3w6wVxe,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2015-11-08T19:03:12.412+0000) > > please allow me to let you in on a little secret. play Olaf if u see a riven on the enemy team. play safely until level 6 with level 6 you can just run over her. just wait for her ult and if you are at even farm and health then u should be able to just wait her ult and then when she goes in u press r and steamroll her. wow, 1 champion out of 200 counters riven? epic argument
There are a lot more counters than you think. Darius, Garen, Vladimir, Olaf, Fiora, etc... You name them. Stop acting like Riven is the ultimate OP broken champion when she is clearly not.
: Watching Riven's overloaded kit is scared me more than a horror movie.
May I remind you that Riven's E scale with 100% **bonus** AD, not total AD. If you don't get the difference between bonus AD and total AD, don't comment on Riven's kit. Riven's kit is pretty overloaded and she definitely needs a rework (for a different reason), true, but she is far from overpowered. A Riven that is behind is a pretty useless Riven. She has legitimately no pokes apart from her R, and her dashes are pretty telegraphic if you ask me. Sure she can be very monstrous if she gets ahead, but if you see her coming for you with her dashes, just walk away, use your cc, or use your mobility spells, or whatever that can counter Riven. Riven also has the highest skill cap in the game due to the requirement of the proper use of combos and animation cancellation. Try playing her and you will see how hard she is to play. But go ahead, circle-jerk with fellow Riven haters. You won't learn if you keep whining.
: > [{quoted}](name=Carol Peletier,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=000400020000000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-08T16:37:11.963+0000) > > RPs are not products. They are the properties of Riot and have **no monetary value**. If you search through ToS you will know what I mean. > > They even clearly state in ToS that Riot Points are not refundable. If they have no monetary value, then Riot shouldn't mind giving the money back since nothing was bought. Need I remind you I am not defending the actions of a flamer? There is no need to keep downvoting me like a childish buffoon. I am merely suggesting that there are many interpretations to these "terms of service" and when you spend money, you are entitled to refunds under law especially if the product is now broken (in this case, inaccessible). The law of the country superscedes any little agreement that a click of a button has supposedly bound you to.
You also keep downvoting my threads too. Does that make you "a childish buffoon"?
: > [{quoted}](name=Carol Peletier,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=000400020000000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-08T16:37:11.963+0000) > > RPs are not products. They are the properties of Riot and have **no monetary value**. If you search through ToS you will know what I mean. > > They even clearly state in ToS that Riot Points are not refundable. If they have no monetary value, then Riot shouldn't mind giving the money back since nothing was bought. Need I remind you I am not defending the actions of a flamer? There is no need to keep downvoting me like a childish buffoon. I am merely suggesting that there are many interpretations to these "terms of service" and when you spend money, you are entitled to refunds under law especially if the product is now broken (in this case, inaccessible). The law of the country superscedes any little agreement that a click of a button has supposedly bound you to.
I wrote this comment way back and I am not going to explain why your argument is just plain wrong, again. Read both of these quotes from me and FranticFurball: From moral perspective you might be right but from legal perspective it's just a nonsensical argument. >**FranticFurball:** Actual LAW agrees with their ToS. No Good were purches (he meant purchased I supposed), no right of ownership granted. Rescinding a service if the customer violates the ToS, does not entitle said customer to any refunds. Its the same if someone gets drunk on an airplane before takeoff and starts to puke in other peoples seats. They will throw that person off the plane, and he w(o)n't get his ticket money back. Buying the ticket didn't buy him ownership of the seat or the plane. >It works like this: >Spending money for RP grants you usage of a number of services, one of which is that you can spend RP, which are not a currency nor a good you own, to gain access to a number of other services. >Since RP are not a good, you have no right of ownership. They are 100% part of the service, and hence subjected to all the rules regarding the service...meaning, the ToS. >If the ToS states that RP cannot be refunded, and it does state that, then they are not refundable. >The moment RP are bought, you already have received the service. >**My argument:** True, but there are no laws/regulations that directly regulate the aspects of virtual services like Riot Point System, since it's treated as an intellectual property of the company (instead of the customers) and a service (owned by that company). A virtual service like this do not have fully established laws (in most of the developed countries), so in this case, it's fair to say that ToS is the final and only legally binding document in this matter. From moral perspective you might be right but from legal perspective it's just a nonsensical argument. Plus, he deserves this punishment if he really is a hardcore flamer. Why should Riot give a banned flamer refund?
: You are talking about how people agree to the ToU and are bound to it, which is correct. I am talking about the content of a ToU which must abide national laws, no matter how hard you have pressed that check box.
True, but there are no laws/regulations that directly regulate the aspects of virtual services like Riot Point System, since it's treated as an intellectual property of the company (instead of the customers) and a service. A virtual service like this do not have fully established laws (in most of the developed countries), so in this case, it's fair to say that ToS is the final and only legally binding document in this matter.
: It works like this: Spending money for RP grants you usage of a number of services, one of which is that you can spend RP, which are not a currency nor a good you own, to gain access to a number of other services. Since RP are not a good, you have no right of ownership. They are 100% part of the service, and hence subjected to all the rules regarding the service...meaning, the ToS. If the ToS states that RP cannot be refunded, and it does state that, then they are not refundable. **The moment RP are bought, you already have received the service.**
You nailed it right there.
: Excuse me, maybe I wasn't clear enough: Laws are different from country to country. Whatever you agree to in the ToU can or cannot be valid depending on where you live.
The principle I stated apply to most countries, and yes, including yours and the OP's country.
Kageryu (EUW)
: But the RP that are **not yet used** might be refundable. I agree at that point, although its mostly neglible amounts of money.
RPs are not products. They are the properties of Riot and have **no monetary value**. If you search through ToS you will know what I mean. They even clearly state in ToS that Riot Points are not refundable.
: > Btw, feel free to quote the LAW its trunped by. I don't know the exact law for it, but I know for a fact that in Germany EULAs/ToUs are not valid, if you didn't agree to it BEFORE you actually bought the software. So basically, whenever you buy software and you only get notified during installation that you have to agree to terms you might not want to, the EULA is completely invalid and you could actually file a lawsuit against it. I sort of made use of this in another game to retrieve access after I lost it (without a lawsuit though). Bit of a complicated story :P However, LoL is free to play. You can install it without paying a penny, so I am unsure how this applies to German law, but I could imagine it is still possible to undermine it somehow. Or maybe this is just the reason why so many companies follow the freemium strategy nowadays. I just wanted to add this to the discussion, because ÜFudginator is not completely wrong that EULAs/ToUs can be trumped by actual laws.
The key point that forms the legality of Terms of Use is "notice and opportunity to review", whether the placement of the terms and click-button ("I agree" boxes, check boxes for when you agree to ToS, etc...) affords the user a reasonable opportunity to find and read the terms without much effort before using a service. There are 2 types of online agreements, clickwrap and browsewrap. Clickwrap agreements are shown foremost and forefront with "I agree" buttons and/or checkboxes, like the League of Legends ToS, which is apparently shown upon account creation, in the installation setup and after clicking "Launch" button in the launcher for the first time. Browsewrap agreements are agreements that are buried in the depth of websites/softwares, and require the users to actually do a research in order to find the ToS. The courts are obviously and logically in favour of clickwrap agreements, because the agreements are clearly shown in front of the users before they can use the various services. So no, ÜFudginator is completely wrong.
: > [{quoted}](name=Carol Peletier,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=000400000000000000010000000000010000,timestamp=2015-11-08T15:21:39.927+0000) > > Wrong. > > Contracts do not have to be physically signed or witnessed. There is one type of contract called "implied contract", in which the involving parties are implied to agree whenever they use a service, for example, when you enter a taxi, you have agreed to pay the fare to the taxi driver at the end of the taxi trip. You don't physically sign this contract, but it's implied you agree to it. > > Online contracts (aka e-signature contracts) are as legally valid as a paper contract or an oral contract. If "implied" things are valid, then implied products are too. The money was used to purchase virtual money (RP). BTW. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just applying blunt logic to it. It may be that it is interpreted as a service if looked at in a certain way, however the other view is also there and if taken to court it would probably be a messy trial.
>(From Terms of Use) A. Intellectual Property. All rights and title in and to the Properties, and all content included therein (including, without limitation, user Accounts, computer code, titles, objects, artifacts, characters, character names, locations, location names, stories, story lines, dialog, catch phrases, artwork, graphics, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions and recordings, **Riot Points** (defined below), audio-visual effects, character likenesses, and methods of operation) are owned by Riot Games or its licensors. The Properties, and all content therein are protected by United States and other international intellectual property laws. (...) > (...) **YOU FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT THE RIOT POINTS SYSTEM AND THE VIRTUAL ITEMS YOU ACQUIRE HAVE NO MONETARY VALUE AND CANNOT BE REDEEMED FOR CASH. NO REFUNDS WILL BE MADE FOR THE PURCHASE OF RIOT POINTS OR FOR VIRTUAL ITEMS OBTAINED USING RIOT POINTS.** Some Virtual Items you obtain may have expiration dates while others do not, and each Virtual Item you obtain using Riot Points will be included in your Account until the earlier of that Virtual Item’s expiration date, or your Account’s expiration or termination date, or such date when Riot Games ceases to offer or support the Game.
: > [{quoted}](name=Carol Peletier,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=000400000000000000010000000000010000,timestamp=2015-11-08T15:21:39.927+0000) > > Wrong. > > Contracts do not have to be physically signed or witnessed. There is one type of contract called "implied contract", in which the involving parties are implied to agree whenever they use a service, for example, when you enter a taxi, you have agreed to pay the fare to the taxi driver at the end of the taxi trip. You don't physically sign this contract, but it's implied you agree to it. > > Online contracts (aka e-signature contracts) are as legally valid as a paper contract or an oral contract. If "implied" things are valid, then implied products are too. The money was used to purchase virtual money (RP). BTW. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just applying blunt logic to it. It may be that it is interpreted as a service if looked at in a certain way, however the other view is also there and if taken to court it would probably be a messy trial.
The thing is, the RPs that you buy are not product. They are part of the intellectual properties belonging to Riot Games, according to ToS. And no, ToS is not implied contract. The OP and all of us who play League of Legends have agreed to it during account creations. It's a valid online contract. Implied contract is only applicable under conditions like using dentist services, public transportation, etc... If you do not understand the basic concept of contract law, don't bother downvoting my comment. Do you even know what "Legally binding" means?
: > [{quoted}](name=Kageryu,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=0004000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2015-11-08T14:43:09.115+0000) > > How is he entitled to money from something he did not pay for (the skins)? > > Btw, feel free to quote the LAW its trunped by. ToU were not actually physically signed. Or witnessed. Which contracts require to be valid. I did quote one, distance selling. If you're not happy with the product you purchased online or over the phone you are entitled to a full refund. In the UK anyway. > [{quoted}](name=Kageryu,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=000400000000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2015-11-08T15:01:56.836+0000) > > Thats the thing, you paid for the RP, not the skins. > Thats a difference. Legal stuff is always about such small differences. Then he is entitled to the RP back. To use this, he needs another account. Same thing really.
Wrong. Contracts do not have to be physically signed or witnessed. There is one type of contract called "implied contract", in which the involving parties are implied to agree whenever they use a service, for example, when you enter a taxi, you have agreed to pay the fare to the taxi driver at the end of the taxi trip. You don't physically sign this contract, but it's implied you agree to it. Online contracts (aka e-signature contracts) are as legally valid as a paper contract or an oral contract.
: > [{quoted}](name=RIPL Mire,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2015-11-08T14:24:59.066+0000) > > Are you sure? I dont feel this would work. Depending what country you're in of course. In the UK we have the Distance Selling Laws/Regulations which protect you when you purchase things online or over the phone.
This law does not apply when he has breached ToS, which is a legally binding contract.
: > [{quoted}](name=Kageryu,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=00040000000000000002,timestamp=2015-11-08T14:31:46.047+0000) > > The only thing he would be entitled to is unspend RP. > Since its the only thing he bought. > > The spend RP to UNLOCK (important legal term!) the skins are not recoverable as he used them and got something in return. Which he no longer has therefore is entitled to have his money back. I am not defending the alleged flaming, however his money is now essentially wasted. He doesn't physically have the skins in his hands. > [{quoted}](name=Glacial Storm,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=5cNmHAKa,comment-id=00040000000000000001,timestamp=2015-11-08T14:30:38.582+0000) > > Except Riot's ToU states they OWN your account. It's not yours, it's theirs. They can do with it whatever they like and terminate the account at any point in time if they so desire because well, as I said, it's theirs. Their ToU are trumped by actual LAW though.
Apart from what others have said, ToS is legally binding, and when you have agreed to their ToS upon registering an account, it means that you have signed a contract with Riot that you will conform to everything the "contract" states and the breach of contract can result in the termination of your account. That's the LAW.
: Well, Diana instashot almost everybody. Lets just say Zyra is not good at all vs fast gapclosing champs (akali, Lb etc). So, just don't pick her vs those champs :D Unless you can keep the distance and farm with your Q/plants. For the rest I can assure you she is still strong as many other immobile mages. Especially with the right items (her plants scales weirdly so you need to go for magpen and a bit bruiserino). You just need someone to peel for you during the teamfights, which is kinda hard to find thsese days :D
Why do you need armor penetration when her plants deal magic damage?
Husker (EUW)
: Where do you play from?
> [{quoted}](name=Riot Húskér,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=iofkuXbW,comment-id=,timestamp=2015-09-22T20:41:43.289+0000) > > Hey hey! > > I'm curious where you're all from? I'm from west Ireland but moved to Dublin a few years ago and i love it! > > What about the rest of you? Any more Irish players here on boards? :D > > ~~Riot Croissant doesn't count because he can't land a Zenith Blade to save his life......~~ I am playing from Hong Kong because of my Cyprus friend. He can't play in any other servers (except for EUW maybe) without high ping/lags.
: Tried it in the client and its not showing. Im talking about the menu client, not in actual gameplay.
There is no way you can make it show in client because your client does not induce as much internet connection as during game (the store and chat). If you want to test your connection before playing an actual game, create a custom game and test your ping. That's the only way you can test your ping.
: Why hasn't Riot added a ping bar to the client indicating our connection to the server.
> [{quoted}](name=Slade Ninja Rat,realm=EUW,application-id=ln3nNJrX,discussion-id=zeMmY1rk,comment-id=,timestamp=2015-09-04T21:17:19.981+0000) > > Everysingle match i had is perfectly fine (nothing is running in the online background btw) > > Then all of a sudden lag 100 to 800 to over 2000 like wtf man and thats just from coming into the game, heres the thing me and nobody can leave a match even if we have lag or the random spike. > > This game is 5 years old now, its also the most played multiplayer game of all time so why the hell haven't they add a ping counter/bar to the client. > > JUST DO IT! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTz93Y-qeq0 LOL how long have you been playing this game? Do you know in top right corner there is a ping indicator and you can actually hold Ctrl+F to show your ping?
: But tell me, how can an automated system differentiate between intentional feed and unintentional bad playing? Specially in ranked, where it's supposed to be competitive and stuff?
What exactly is your point? If someone plays badly, and it's not because of obvious offences like trolling and/or intentional feeding, they should **never** be reported, no matter if it is ranked or not, and your question is another issue, which is not even related to what OP said.
Show more

Viktorous

Level 30 (EUNE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion