: You divide champions into two groups: -easy to play, but depending on strategical gameplay -mechanically challening, high damage champs The first is easy to play, but if you arent in the position where you're supposed to be, you have no impact. The second doesnt have to play that strategically, because they can, when properly executed, easily kill a target and do the objectives without resistance.
Not only is this a failed interpretation of what I said, this is also just ludacris and makes no sense :D
Infernape (EUW)
: Well it's not hard to kill a tank. Let's see, you have The Black Cleaver, Blade of the Ruined King, Last Whisper and its upgrades, Liandry's Torment, Void Staff and every single armour/magic penetration item in the game. Then you have champions like Fiora, Irelia, Trundle, Vayne, Kog'Maw and Master Yi who have kits that allows them deal with tanks. So there's no point implying that tanks have little counterplay.
: Do you plan on playing professionally? No then the meta does not matter.
Im just gonna ignore you because you obviously cant think rationally.
: Again, for reasons i cannot fathom, champs with tons of mobility and damage passes for so hard and "mechanical demanding", while immobile champs are implied to be easy and forgiving. And of course tanks got "less counterplay" than a {{champion:238}} :D. There is nigh to no need to read this entirely, really.
True, if you think that tanks have more counterplay than a Zed then youre truly either too low in elo or just unable to think rationally, so reading this would be a waste of time for your kind :)
: The thing is: What kind of need for strategical gameplay is there for "mechanical" champions that 100-0 you at every encounter?
This makes no sense and contradicts itself. Please rewrite your point in a way that isnt.
Rioter Comments
: ''while mechanical skill seems almost negligble right now. Just take something simple like Lissandra, keep pushing the wave with Q, then make one TP play and snowball the game, '' Nothing wrong with Roams or ganking.. its just that it was already done at Higher elo especially LCS. Reality is that pure laners that lane for more then 20 minutes, were always pretty bad.. they never Look around them. I dont think its riot forcing people to not lane.. its just that with the New Dragon buffs and Current Objectives being so strong it forces plays to be made Botlane and as result the winning team snowballs and gets drake. I would take Fire drake and 2 kills botlane any day over killing 1 guy at mid, unless i can take down his mid tower. I still see alot of Solo plays work, like split pushers and its still viable. especially in toplane. Objective fights and teamfights are important now.. thats the meta and it will keep changing.
You still seem to compeletely miss the point. You all think its EITHER teamwork or not. Its the intensity and the full on DEPENDENCY on teamplay that is so devestatingly anti-fun for so many players. No matter how good you play by yourself, in this meta, like never before, you cant do ANYTHING wihtout teamwork. Worse players can win lane against you just because they have a better team and its never been this extreme. Please read what I write and apply common sense.
TTekkers (EUW)
: Except that you have always been reliant on your team in every season in all stages of a game - I'm not sure I understand your point. And how does _"proving your individual skill"_ differ from snowballing? You say you don't mean snowballing, but you want reward for being better than your lane opponent, failing to turn an advantage from that means you're just failing to snowball your lead and playing badly. People who quit LoL because they need to rely on their teammates (or because their opponents help each other) quit because they were playing the wrong game - teamplay is, was and always will be a core component of this game and if you don't like it go play Call of Duty.
Are you trying this hard not to understand me? Reliance on your team can differ in intensity you know? It has reached a point where you cant do ANYTHING, even in laningphase, if your teamwork isnt on par. Sure that is important, but please stop refusing to understand that people are getting sick of being completely team-dependent. It has never been like this and people are quittin League because of that. Denying that or bending logic so it suits your impression doesnt help.
TTekkers (EUW)
: I actually disagree - we've just come out of an overly snowbally meta where the better jungler would snowball more lanes harder and/or the better laners would snowball and win the game from there. We're just now in a meta where you can play snowball champions but it's harder, and you can play safer team-play champions more easily, the meta is probably more balanced for being slightly slower. Yes, assassins aren't as prevalent, but as an ADC player that leaves me screaming hallelujah because at least now supports are able to peel for me if they see fit .....
You dont seem to understand. This isnt about solocarrying or snowballing, Im talking about giving players a chance to prove their individual skill for at least the early portion of the game. This applies to mages as much as it does to assassines. As it is now, even in laning phase you are completely reliant on your team and thus the game rewards you laughably little for individual skill, but excessively for teamplay and strategy. Many people hate this system and have thus quit League. Sure some people might enjoy it more, but the statistics speak for themselves.
: I like it as it is. The game IS supposed to be team based. I love it when I save someone or they save me, even if nothing is said there is an invisible high five there.
This is so irrelevant and doesnt at all consider my points :(. The game is not teambased it is completely teamreliant.With everything you do, even in laning phase at this point, you are completely reliant on your team. Many people feel that League rewards you for how good your team is, not how good you are anymore. All Im saying is that players should at least have the first 10 minutes to prove their individual skill. The last 20-40 minutes can be decided by teamwork. But taking EVERYTHING from players is just ridiculous and has clearly backfired.
Rioter Comments
Evanitis (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=scILyfe,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U6cAR735,comment-id=0009000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-07T12:40:37.490+0000) > > it can also bring a LOT of unbalance and heavily favour one team over another in certain situations. Indeed. Taking dragons give a serious advantage. I believe the early-mid game got a lot more important with the drake-update, and the team who purposefully tries to get ahead at the right moment to take them will have a good time. But it's entirely dependent on the two teams, so I can't call that an -unfair- advantage. You let the enemy to collet 3 mountains or 3 oceans because you only take infernals for the damage? Gg, wp - it's not Riot's fault. Now I don't know how often drakes are contested -in general- but they are bloody well fought for in my games. I have to add that I usually jungle, while having buddies on voice chat. I keep reminding my team on important spawns, try to time my ganks so that if it succeeds, we can immediately turn for a drake. But even with randoms I just go for the pit solo when we get man advantage in a teamfight, pinging like hell so they come to assist me instead of dying. If they don't listen but survive a bit, I may still be in time. So... I admit that the pressure to take dragons might not be a universal thing, and I'm the one who's maintaining it for my team. But I believe junglers since 6.9 should totally do that. It's like knowing how to freeze the lane when you are mid. You can play without that knowledge, but you'll be in a disadvantage. About the periodic spawns.. you know if I knew that each dragon will spawn once in order, I wouldn't care about them at all. I don't take a mountain dragon (for example) to have the buff for team. I take it for I'm afraid the enemy will get -two-. A double mountain buff (for example) is scary. Towers crumble before the poor laner comes back from shopping. And they are only one mistake away from getting the third. The horror. People flame their jg if he neglects a lane, but they don't blame him if he lets the enemy 2-3 strong buffs of the same kind. But the jg will know he did badly. With periodic spawns, everyone would know that they can safely ignore most dragons, and contest heavily for a few. I imagine there would be very few teamfights about them in very set intervals. The jg who has more time on their hand would take the lesser ones in solo. I prefer the randomness that either gets us to largely ignore dragons, or keeps us on out toes so we don't get a serious disadvantage. But usually the mix of the two, and we never know what approach we'll need in the next 6 minutes.
Everything you say is lacking completele necessity of logical connections. You introduce a situation and the way you justify or explain what would happen in that scenario, is completely illogical. Your assumption of how the game plays out under certain circumstances is wildly false.
Father Tios (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=scILyfe,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U6cAR735,comment-id=000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-07T15:40:22.084+0000) > > First of all, Im a succesful Diamond player but THANK YOU so much for intellectually admitting your defeat by insulting me <3. I wasn't insulting you. If you are only diamond it means you've got something to work on. Point being, maybe more diversity to your strategies. (Hell, everyone has a factor to improve on, even pro's) > > Youre actually right about your first point, in-game adaptation should be rewarded more than pre-game planning, I agree with you on that matter. However, that is the only point you made during this paragraph, a point that never defied what I was saying, proving you completely misunderstood my intentions and perspective. What you dont understand is, that this in-game adaptation, first of all, does NOT exist. Teams take Drakes almost regardless of its type, as a standardised objective. Meaning when you have time and the resources, you just take drake. Furthermore, teams dont even play around drakes. There are NO dragonfights, NOBODY is trying to deny dragons, and often teams leave drakes up for longer periods of time because they have no real use for them. https://youtu.be/k6mj9eNrpt8 For example skt in that video just gives up the old drake, and decide to go for the tower instead. Why take a risk in a fight when you can secure an obj worth about the same, or more. About playing around drake? It's a question on how important of an objective drake should be. Not about them being effective or not. > > Another BIG problem with your "adaption" mechanic is, that certain teams will INEVITABLY benefit much more from certain drakes than other teams will. In a best or worst case scenario, one team can be HEAVILY favoured solely by the coincidential factor of dragon, which is simply WRONG in a highly STRATEGICAL game. I thought I explained well WHY different teams will never benefit from the same drake in the same way. If a team takes a dragon it synergises with, it scaled exponentially, and strategic decisions and plays around their comps' strength will be significantly enhanced. > On the opposite side, some teams have absolutely NO use for certain drakes. If you play against a full on hard engage comp with 0 poke you simply dont need Ocean Drake, there is no "adapting" here. > But that's the point. Each comp beats another in some sense. If the drake favors the other team, the team that isn't favored is forced to equal out the advantage in some other way (for example by pushing a tower) or to stop the other team from gaining this advantage. This problem existed even before the new drakes, and will always be there. Why? Because the other comp will also always be stronger earlier. The team that will be peaking at a specific time ALWAYS gains the advantage over the drake. (as the other team is either forced to find a way to even out the advantage elsewhere, or risk a bad fight, or > I see where youre coming from, I agree with your perception, but you didnt really understand my points, proven by your repeatedly irrelevant replys. I do understand your points. I just disagree with them. And a lot of your arguments thus far have been based on bad strategic play. (Edit: to elaborate, for example you saying that x team can't use y buff at all - they clearly can. Is some buff more effective for them? Sure. Does not mean it's a bad thing.)
> Have you considered that this could be why you aren't ranked higher? :) I consider this an insult because it came completely unreasoned and irrelevant. What do you want to tell me with your second point? One of Riots intentions with the new Drakes WAS to bring back dragonfights, in a non-snowbally fashion. Riot has not been able to achieve that because as a strategic objective, Dragon is simply not reliable. Thats why teams arent willing to commit to and around Drake, so they just treat it like a standardised objective, similar to the 4-buff dragon. Since dragon has so little strategical reliability and the value thus goes down, teams also see no reason to deny it, hence no dragon fights. Your next point is utter bullshit, no offense. One comp will scale indefinitely better with one effect than another, into extreme scenarios. If you play against a poke comp and get 2-3 ocean drakes early, the game is decided purely by a LUCK factor. In my opinion that is unaccaptable. One thing you need to do is stop thinking buffs are good and viable for any teamcomp. These buffs are only ever truly effective if stacked to at least 2 and ONLY if it is accumulated under the right circumstances.
Silisa (EUNE)
: It makes sense for a team that is ahead to take half a minute out if its busy schedule to pick up a Dragon, because, relevant buff or not, there is no reason to leave it for the weaker team to sneak away with it. The stronger team doesn't play around the Dragon, it simply doesn't leave this objective on the map when it doesn't take much time or effort to get it.
Yes I know andin my opinion thats bad, thats not what Riot intended to do with this. The new drakes dont take the strategical value they were intended to, they are just taken no matter what as a standardised objective. Is this your point?
: ever heard of '' We want every game to be different '' Random dragon does that and every dragon is good besides cloud drake no problem here
If you dont even read what I have to say and youre unable to think in a rational manner, please restrain yourself from trying to value your opinion as highly as mine or someone else's.
: I kinda understand what you mean. In Champselect you decide as team which comp you want to play for example a 1v3v1 Splitpushcomp. This comp would highly prefer a mountain drake, but there is a possibilty you won´t get it at all ingame. Your team may be able to slay 4 Dragons until 35mins but the chance to get there without a Mountain Drake is not that low. With this Comp the enemy team would also be forced to fight you over an Mountain Drake, but .. you know if there is now Mountain Drake this won´t be an issue for them at all ^^ Still i think you Solutions aren´t that good. The first got the problem that the value of each Drake is NOT equal. Some of them might fit better in specific comps still I think cloud drake isn´t very important at all. so the first drakes wouldn´t be objectives you want to contest. Maybe you take them if your team is ahead, but i think you wouldn´t risk a 5v5 fight for it. They made the spawn random so that each Drake despite their value might get equaly taken. Also their patches to balance their buffs gives that impression. I often thought that this DragonSystem is quite nice, because there is more variation. Still this system is far from being perfect. I thought maybe you should change some of the Drakes itself. I would make the Cloud and Ocean Drake a one time only. So both of them only spawn once a game and gives the same stats like a two stacked Cloud/Ocean Drake atm. All Dragons would still spawn randomly but this would make the possibility much higher for stacked Mountain and Infernal Drakes. Also it would prevent these 3 times CLoud Drakes a game.... where noone really want to fight for theses buffs. We can´t came up with er perfect solution for the system. I appreciate the thought of Riot behind the changes, but it will take most likly the hole Season to nearly get this system balanced.
Your first paragraph perfectly describes one of my issues with the current system, which is the strategic unreliability. You simlpy cant afford to efficiently play around drakes becuase there is no guarantee they will benefit you if you play around them. After that you unfortunately lose all sense of logic and knowledge of how to make sense or how to get your point across. It might be due to your expression difficulties, but there is absolutely no lgic in saying my system wouldnt work because the drakes arent equal in strength. Theye have disparate strategic effects, meaning they vary in effectiveness for specific teamcomps. I do agree with your point that there should be less of Drakes and an increase in the effect, because right now, drakes by themselves have little to no impact. And amassing several required dragons takes a lot of luck and time.
: Thing about Dragon fights is that you have to mess up to cause them... you should never risk a dragon fight because you don't have to, there are so many better staging areas than Dragon due to its limited available flanking opportunity plus is one of the largest staging areas which means aoe and teamfight abilities get weakened... The way dragon has and will always work is if there is a team in the lead they will take dragon, the losing team can't contest as that can easily lose them both dragon (as a stronger team has better tools for securing objectives) and can lose them an avoidable fight which in turn loses them even more. If the team is behind they can't try to take dragon as the winning team will have the ward advantage and as such can collapse and kill everyone which is very bad when your already losing. If the teams are equal neither team is gonna start dragon unless they know they can secure it as doing a risky dragon take can lose you the game, so they aren't gonna try to start dragon rights. So yes dragons fights aren't as popular as we would hope, although they have increased in frequency since the change, this isn't because of a randomize system because a linear one will result in similar... it's that dragon fights aren't never necessary, you don't start dragon when you know they can respond like you would in a dragon fight... you take dragons when everyone who can try to contest is dead, the enemy team is preoccupied with something and thus can't get there in time, or you do it when there are no wards thus sneaking it... none of these allow for Dragon fights because the team who is taking the Dragon doesn't want a dragon fight to risk their advantage.... Dragon fights are low elo mistakes, not something which most players will want. > Your next point is wrong, Riot has recently been buffing more than nerfing (Mid lane Mage rework, Trinity, etc), and especially earlier this season Riot has continuosly buffed and re-buffed a ton of champions (Poppy, Ekko, Azir). While generally they are more about nerfing than buffing, they have had a phase when they just buffed a lot and that turned out to be a complete catastrophe. There have been no change to the amount of buffs to nerfs... there have been an increase in neutral changes where a champion would get both a buff and a nerf. But ekko has had one buff in his life, the rest are nerfs, azir has had bug fixes and nerfs, poppy has had mostly nerfs with only 2 buffs, one when she came out and one next patch... these buffs just aren't happening, instead these champions are getting nerfed with compensation in other areas which I think you are mistaking for favouring buffs.
What you say about dragonfights is true, but there was a time when dragonfights were not only viable, but necessary. Only did they snowball TOO hard and Riot didnt like that. With the new strategic value of the Elemental Drakes, the snowball could be diminished, while the strategic value is raised. Right now Dragons are too weak and have too little strategical value, as as being unreliable, so teams cant focus around dragons efficiently. All of this would be changed for the better with the changes I proposed. What you say next ONLY applied to the new drakes and is exactly what WOULDNT happen if the Elemental Drakes were made viable for dragonfights. Firstly, hings wouldnt snowball too hard because elementals only add a strategical value, one that has counterplay. Furthermore, teams now wont BOTH fight to get drake, but ONE team who wants the drake will try to acquire it, while the other team only tries to deny it as long as its up. This could eventually lead to dragon fights, depending on how hard teams are willing to commit, but it doesnt force two teams into just wanting to take the same drake. Also, as the team thats behind, you no longer have to commit, you just have to try and deny it and profit THAT way. Dragon fights are something that has developed in high elo and pro play, so I really wonder how you can call it "low elo mistakes". Right now, yes, dragon fights are a mistake just BECAUSE the new drakes are poorly strategically implemented. Dragon fights were too snowbally because youd get the double gold reward for dragon and kills if you won. The new Drake system limits that gold influx, since Riots intention in the first place was ALSO to bring back Dragonfights because of their impact and it being very exciting in pro play. With the changes I have suggested, Dragon would gain a proper strategical value for a team, and give it actual purpose to play around, as well as give the opponent team a reason to deny the drake. Lastly, this is kind of irrelevant to the topic, but for a while Riot did buff a LOT, Ekko got gradually buffed for 3 patches until people discovered tank Ekko and that was a mess
Aezander (EUW)
: Strategies are good and nice, but never forget that even the best layed plans can get greatly annulled the moment you begin implementing them. That's why you have tactics. Through that prism the new system, as is, with the randomization included, is good enough. Maybe the RNG code might need a bit of tweeking to reduce the probability of the same dragon spawning in a row more. But that is all.
It is not good because in a best or worst case scenario, certain teamcomps will inevitably benefit MUCH more from the drakes spawned than others, creating a huge unfair advantage for one team, completely undeservedly. Furthermore, with the new Dragons Riot wanted to add a strategical value beyond snowball, through gold or generic buffs, to the game. AND they wanted to return Dragon fights. People dont CARE about what dragon spawns, they take it as a standardised objective in the event that time and resources are suiting. Sure some Dragons are favoured, but the impact of that is so insignificant that it is practically negligible. Dragon fights have not returned because teams arent willing to strategically play around dragon, as it is unreliable. This means teams dont have to deny dragons, and dragon teamfights cant happen. People think I hate the new system, but Riot had a beautiful idea with the new Drakes, but a rather unfortunate implemantation in that aspect. I only try to improve it so it reaches its full potential and the strategic value as well as dragonfights can happen!
Father Tios (EUNE)
: Or then you don't understand my point. Or Riot's. The question at hand is, do we want the dragons to reward players who can plan ahead and follow a plan they've made. Or do we want the dragons to reward players who are able to adapt to different situations. In my eyes, the ability to adapt shows greater strategic superiority. Example? For example when the new dragons came, Fnatic just ignored them all together and pushed while opponents tried to force the meta strategy of stacking 5 dargons, and they won because of this. This is one way of doing it. Just because _**YOU**_ don't know how to use a specific buff in some comps, doesn't mean they CAN'T be used. Have you considered that this could be why you aren't ranked higher? :)
First of all, Im a succesful Diamond player but THANK YOU so much for intellectually admitting your defeat by insulting me <3. Youre actually right about your first point, in-game adaptation should be rewarded more than pre-game planning, I agree with you on that matter. However, that is the only point you made during this paragraph, a point that never defied what I was saying, proving you completely misunderstood my intentions and perspective. What you dont understand is, that this in-game adaptation, first of all, does NOT exist. Teams take Drakes almost regardless of its type, as a standardised objective. Meaning when you have time and the resources, you just take drake. Furthermore, teams dont even play around drakes. There are NO dragonfights, NOBODY is trying to deny dragons, and often teams leave drakes up for longer periods of time because they have no real use for them. Another BIG problem with your "adaption" mechanic is, that certain teams will INEVITABLY benefit much more from certain drakes than other teams will. In a best or worst case scenario, one team can be HEAVILY favoured solely by the coincidential factor of dragon, which is simply WRONG in a highly STRATEGICAL game. I thought I explained well WHY different teams will never benefit from the same drake in the same way. If a team takes a dragon it synergises with, it scaled exponentially, and strategic decisions and plays around their comps' strength will be significantly enhanced. On the opposite side, some teams have absolutely NO use for certain drakes. If you play against a full on hard engage comp with 0 poke you simply dont need Ocean Drake, there is no "adapting" here. I see where youre coming from, I agree with your perception, but you didnt really understand my points, proven by your repeatedly irrelevant replys.
Silisa (EUNE)
: True. 3 buffs of the same type are not common, and even if they were, teams rarely get the Elder to boost it.
Also with the extended difficulty of acquiring the new buffs as I proposed, I would actually double the effect from one drake and let it stack twice (maybe?). Right now the effect is honestly too week and unimpactful, as we can see there is still no real play around drake.
Silisa (EUNE)
: Would I like all Dragons to be more relevant? Sure. But there was a time when Dragons brought a lot of global gold with them and teams tended to pay more attention to them than the turrets. It made for long games and easy throws. With that in mind, I prefer these Dragons. Would I like for Dragons to become a game changer? No. I do not want a team that has made nothing but bad decision and has no ability to play from behind trip over a Dragon and make a comeback within 15 seconds. Something like TSM WildTurtle in S5 Summer Split, who ended up winning an already lost game for his team after throwing a blind Corki rocket and stealing Baron. Players shouldn't play around any objective other than the enemy Nexus. Everything else that happens on the map outside of the Nexus destruction should serve to get a team closer to it, not detract it from it. Teams should be allowed to decide their own win conditions, instead of being forced into only one type of game play.
Anything can be a gamechanger in that sense. What i meant was, that one or two dragons in perfect synergy at the right place can have a LOT of impact, unlike it is now. Of course Drakes should be harder to acquire as well but.. the value now is not really strategical nor impactful..
Silisa (EUNE)
: Well, when you say stuff like that I can't really disagree with you, can I? xD While I might not agree with all your points, I think your ideas have potential. If anything else, this much attention should keep this thread in a visible spot for some time.
Unfortunately many people downvote my post because they assume Im strictly against Elemental Dragons in general, even though the opposite is the case, and I just want to optimise the system.
Evanitis (EUNE)
: Hmm.. Maybe it's just me... But do you jungle a lot? I remember before the patch, it was like "_mehh, nothing better to do, take a dragon_". These days it's "_oh crap, the ward at the strong dragon is down for 10 seconds. Was it a sweeper? Could the support put it back, or should I abort this gank? Could mid help contesting?_". The presence of an Infernal or a Mountain definitely makes a jungler's life more complicated and tense. I love that. But I wouldn't enjoy it if that tension was constant (eg: with super balanced dragons buffs that some people keep asking for), or if it was periodical. I love that no two match is the same from dragon-aspect, and I love that sometimes the jg, or even the team has to improvise around spawns. If I wanted to suggest a change, I'm afraid I'd aim for the opposite direction: I'd suggest to remove the rune that shows what the next spawn will be. Let the team that can improvise -faster- get the advantage!
Youre making a lot of sense and I understand the excitement. However I must say I just cant agree with the current, random and strategically unappealing system. Even though it might bring "diversity" and some exhilerating tension, it can also bring a LOT of unbalance and heavily favour one team over another in certain situations. Also, even though Mountain Drake and Infernal Drake have a lot of tension, are they really that focused? I dont think so. In almost all situations Dragons are still being taken while uncontested, as a purely standardised objective. Why wouldnt you want the periodical pressure? In my opinion that is the perfect mix of both worlds!
: > [{quoted}](name=scILyfe,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U6cAR735,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-07T11:55:08.654+0000) > > Your point being Cloud Drake is strong, and all pro, non-Riot-ass-licking analysts and professional players are wrong? At least is my point, not someone else's point.
Oh so I cant agree with the majority that Cloud Drake sucks? Maybe I think it sucks because getting to a location on the map 2 seconds faster is not a game changer in 99 percent of games, but what do I know.
Silisa (EUNE)
: > This would also be a reason for teams to start actively DENYING the buff from the enemies. This, I would like. It would speed the game up and force people to pay attention to Dragons (so far, I've had two types of teammates: the _we must take all Dragons or we lose_, and the_ what's a Dragon?_ type). Some consistency in that aspect would be nice. I feel that, since the numerous changes to Dragon, many players are no longer sure whether the Dragon is important or not. > My one solution proposed the dragon to be activated and then only be available for a shorter period of time. This would pressure the team that wants to acquire the drake, and give a chance to the team trying to deny it, since time is ticking for them. It would make some explosive matches, that's for sure.
Its good to see someone obviously involved and informed get to like my ideas. I really think my ideas would help the system reach even beyond its initial plans, and be an amazing addition to strategic, and NON-snowbally games.
Silisa (EUNE)
: > Dragons are supposed to synergise with certain comps and playstyles. This inevitable creates scnerios, where certain teams will benefit much more from a dragon than another team, regardless of how they "adapt" to the situation. While that is true, the team that will benefit less can simply contest the Dragon and deny the buff to the team that values it more. That is also a part of adapting. And if the first team is too weak to contest, then it doesn't really matter which Dragons spawns, since the opposing team is ahead either way.
I dont quite understand what your point is here. If I understand you correctly, you mean to say that a team can deny the important drake if its ahead? If that is true, then that would only support my point, that teams HAVE to play around dragon IF they want to synergise with it. Only with investment comes reward.
Silisa (EUNE)
: It was an example. Most of us make our Dragon related decisions based on which type is spawning and how important it is to each team. Just one buff doesn't do that much on its own, so I wouldn't say that one team failing to stop the other from getting a beneficial Dragon buff would mean the end of the game. Dragons, as a whole, are not big game changers unless two teams are really equal. In most cases the team that secures them does so uncontested and would have won regardless of the buff.
And wouldnt you want dragons to be more impactful? To truly have strategical meaning and potentially be a gamechanger in a non-snowbally, but purely strategical game? Isnt that what Riot tried to implement in the first place, yet failed to accomplish, as completele unreliability on the system demotivates players from playing around it?
: > First of all, this "adaptation" is randomised, because different teams require different drakes, different comps and champs benefit WAY more from certain drakes than others, and regardless of "adaptation", this will always make it be dependent on LUCK. You realise adaptation isn't supposed to be predictable... adaptation is adapting to your situation in order to over come obstacles, having predictability isn't adaptation as that's planning not improvising. Everything in the game is technically random thus luck, your opponent's picks, your team's picks, who gets fed, where the jungler currently is... everything which you don't directly control is randomized based on who is in the game... every single game you have to adapt to these situations which is what separates good players for great ones... you adapt to what ever the game throws at you, no two games are the same and this translates to dragons, your plans have to alter in order to accommodate which is how you have always won at league... Technically everything you do in life is probability and luck, league no different. > remember the last time Riot tried to make everything OP? We had a TRIO top lane meta at MSI, something that we have never seen in competetive LoL in the last 3 years. That is when you try to make "everything OP and thus viable". Firstly op and randomised are very different things so this point is irrelevant. Secondly may I point out DotA 2, I know blasphemy but oh well... it has always had this design philosophy and its as balanced as league which has always had the opposite so neither is statistically superior. Thirdly riot have never tried to make everything op... Riot have always maintained a nerf over buff philosophy on the game, bringing strong champion down rather than brining weak champions up... So this point gets rendered mute as soon as you realised this period never happened. > Randomised spawns favour certain comps and champions more than others, and THAT is unbalanced. How... think about it, if a certain comp relies on a dragon it might not spawn, on the other hand with your idea it might spawn first, and one particular champion might spike around where it spawns... why would you use a champion who spikes earlier or later when you can pick one particular one which spikes exactly when you need it... suddenly that champion shoves all the others out of the meta because there is no reason to give up that advantage... So your idea makes the meta smaller while the current one doesn't... that's unbalanced. > The purpose of Dragons was to add a STRATEGICAL VALUE to the game, where the different effects would help different teams in the way THEY NEEDED TO. This would not only encourage teams to acquire these drakes, but also to DENY them But that's assumptions, your idea might not yield any different result. People have been dragon fighting a ton more now and by doing so people take and deny them... but if a team is ahead it doesn't matter if they are randomized or not people will just take them without thinking about the attribute because why not and it brings the closer to elder... So your idea doesn't have any reason to deny or contest any more than the current one.
You make a lot of good points here. First you talk about adaptation and how its a major part of the game, how League essentially works. This is true, and could also apply to dragons. But youre only talking theory, in game NOBODY really applies to the dragons. Like I said, its only taken as a standardised objective, very often being disregarded of its type, so there is no "adaptation" or strategic play around it. Additionally, there is still that fact that the luck factor can, in a best or worst case scenario, heavily impact the game and favour one team a lot more than the other. This is wrong for a highly competetive game that never included "chance" besides with critical hits. Your next point is wrong, Riot has recently been buffing more than nerfing (Mid lane Mage rework, Trinity, etc), and especially earlier this season Riot has continuosly buffed and re-buffed a ton of champions (Poppy, Ekko, Azir). While generally they are more about nerfing than buffing, they have had a phase when they just buffed a lot and that turned out to be a complete catastrophe. The randomised spawning makes dragons unbalanced in-game, as in a best or worst case scenario, the dragons spawned can HEAVILY favour one team and thus create a completely random and undeserved advantage. Your opinion that systematic dragon spawns could make the game unbalanced is very justified and logical though. In my opinion though, by implementing a system that would make the dragon hard to acquire (potential initiation drake, limited amount of time on drake), it would force teams to invest a lot more effort and resources into acquiring the drakes they have planned for. Additionally, the opponent team would finally have a reason to try to deny the drake from the enemy team, which could bring back dragon fights, as it was intended to. If this system WOULD get out of hand though, nerfs to it would probably be necessary. So while I can see where youre coming from, Im strongly convinced that the current system is a lot more problematic in terms of balance, and the new system would, if implemented correctly, improve a lot of aspects of the concept. Your next point is wrong. First of all, dragon fights BARELY happen, and you know that. Secondly, I did explain why a systematic approach would encourage dragon fights because teams can strategically play around dragon, giving it a much greater purpose and potential impact on the game. This would inevitably motivate the opponent team to DENY the drake from the profiting team, as they are also assisted by the time pressure on the enemy team. SO my idea DOES have a lot of reason to acquire and deny more than the current one.
Silisa (EUNE)
: > Therefore there is a pure luck factor in this concept, which wasnt meant to be in the first place. Yesterday, in one of my games, the Ocean Dragon was the first one. So, my ADC and I worked extra hard to be the dominant duo in our lane so that we could contest if not take that Dragon without opposition. And we did. The next Dragon was Wind, which we did not care much about - useful, but nothing to fall all over ourselves for. So we rotated to other lanes and spread our attention to the rest of the map, in order to use our team's overall advantage. Our jungler ended up taking it on his own, since we were so ahead that nobody could fight him for it. Which Dragon spawns is luck. What you do about it is tactic.
You missed all my main points here :( and essentially all you said was that you had ONE good game in synergistic play with the dragons. We dont even see that in LCS...
Silisa (EUNE)
: So, what stops teams from simply creating a composition that can heavily snowball off predictable Dragon buffs? For example, your first solution would make early game poke compositions broken. Comps like {{champion:126}} {{champion:64}} {{champion:103}} {{champion:51}} {{champion:25}} who don't have much of a team fight but can take advantage off greater movement speed, regeneration and pushing power provided by the first three dragons in the order you suggested. You would pretty much force a new strict meta with this, which is not very healthy for the game. Now, one might think that it wouldn't matter much, since most people don't bother synchronizing with their teammates, but this is the era of DQ, and more people play in groups than not.
This really is a good point, and the only sensible counter-argument I have seen here. Youre right, in the event that the first dragon up WOULD snowball the game too heavily, it would have to be nerfed or some other changes would have to be implemented. The reason why I think it WOULD work out fine still, is because 1) all dragons are available, throughout different times, late game is more impactful than early IN THE MOMENT! 2) This would also be a reason for teams to start actively DENYING the buff from the enemies. 3) My one solution proposed the dragon to be activated and then only be available for a shorter period of time. This would pressure the team that wants to acquire the drake, and give a chance to the team trying to deny it, since time is ticking for them.
Father Tios (EUNE)
: Different comps adapt differently. Well duh. Point being that for example an ocean dragon would be really good against and on a poke comp. However if they gain a wind drake, which isn't their primary stat, it makes them better at something else they're aren't as good at originally. Giving them more options to expand the strengths of their comp. allowing them to play it differently. While AGAINST them it could also be used, expanding the opponents ways of playing against a specific comp. Same goes for all the dragons, but in different ways. The way it currently works, requires the players to be creative in the usage of the buffs. This opens the game up for more strategic diversity and creativity.
Your argumenting style is very obvious in its way, that you take an argument, and in any way possible, try to justify your opinion, no matter how illogical the reasoning. What you dont understand here is that dragons dont just "add" onto utility and thus "make you adapt". Youre saying it very nicely but in no way does it match reliaty or logic. Dragons that synergise with certain comps make those teams scale EXPONENTIALLY with those buffs, thus heavily favouring them not ONLY in strategic play, but also MATHEMATICALLY. Why would a siege comp need movement speed? There is no world in which a team with champs with utterly high scaling would benefit more from a Mountain drake than an infernal drake. Youre saying it like players are already being "creative" with their buffs. When has that happened? Not even in LCS are teams being "creative" with the drakes. Theyre simply taken as standardises objectives. Remember, I did not criticise the lack of strategic diversity and creativity, I praised that. The unreliability and thus, strategic deprioritisation, is what denies the system its full effect in strategic enrichment.
Larry (EUNE)
: I kinda agree with this. The dragons are great, there is a slight strategy behind them, but still people kill them so that the enemy won't get the buff, whether they need it or not.
Thank you, finally someone who reads and lets their brain apply to the logic...
Leiopython (EUNE)
: Do you always have to have a perfect plan? Randomisation of a dragon who will be spawned next is GREAT! It adds a bit of chaos into the game, and requires adaptation, you have to choose whether you will fight for it, or you can leave it for enemy team. I had a games with 3 ocean drakes in a row... and with infernals also... It's... It's FUN {{sticker:slayer-jinx-catface}}
Oh great, chaos in a highly strategical game. You convinced me
Aezander (EUW)
: Strategies are good and nice, but never forget that even the best layed plans can get greatly annulled the moment you begin implementing them. That's why you have tactics. Through that prism the new system, as is, with the randomization included, is good enough. Maybe the RNG code might need a bit of tweeking to reduce the probability of the same dragon spawning in a row more. But that is all.
You didnt really read what I wrote. In summary, teams dont even want to play around drake because it is so strageically unreliable. Dragon fights have not returned for that reason, and drakes are just taken as standardise objectives. Additionally, this system can, in a best or worst case scenario, heavily favour (no subject to discussion) one team over the other and that just makes the concept UNBALANCED.
: > [{quoted}](name=scILyfe,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U6cAR735,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2016-07-06T21:02:42.382+0000) > > It is not fine. Different comps and champions adapt very differently to the disparate buffs. Which would readily amount to no difference at all because, say, if the red dragon was always the first, we will see team firstpicking champions that are able to immediatly capitalize on that. And we will probably see dragon fights at minute 3 and people going like "ok we lost first dragon our team is useless without it open mid"...
Which is a very dull and one-sided way of looking at this. Equally, I could say that with the addition of Right Herald, teams will prioritise the early acquiry of that buff, preferably with a fast pushing, early game top laner and jungler, thus completely snowballing the map. Did that happen? No. Is it something different? Not really. Many of you here are butthurt because you think im exclusively complaining about the new dragons, when Im actually just suggesting why it could be better, and in what aspects it has definitely failed. For one, the system was supposed to BRING BACK dragon fights, which it did not, because teams dont want to strategically play around drake, since there is absolutely no reliability for it. Thats also why it is almost always taken uncontestedly as a standardised objective.
Evanitis (EUNE)
: I love the new dragons, mainly because they differ in strength, usefulness, and that they spawn randomly. Why? They make matches pretty dynamic. Some are valued highly, always warded and contested, while another gets largely ignored for even longer periods of time, letting teams to pursue other objectives. I love the fact that I (the team I mean) have to evaluate the relative value of every drake spawning, and how safe it is to take it at any given moment. As jungler / support, a starting infernal means a tense early game. I can't allow it to not be warded, and I need to get a kill on mid/bot (or murder their jg) asap, so we can take it. You can't farm with clean conscience while one is up. Mountain has about the same perceived value, but it's a lot easier to solo. Mid and bot is pushing, enemy jg has been seen on top? That drake is ours - just keep them occupied for a minute longer. I look at cloud drakes as extra big Gromps. Nice xp+gold, noone cares if I take it or if it stands there for long. If we are behind, I won't touch it. If neither the enemy does, it's one less objective to worry about, so we can concentrate on towers, barons and whatnot. I wouldn't want this system to be fixed. It's exciting to see how teams react to various spawns at various points on the game. _"Damn, -another- Infernal is coming again? Leave those second towers for now, we don't want to lose anyone in the next half minute."_ TL:DR There are so many mindgames involved around the new dragons, and those are fun. And those are fun because of the random spawning and different buff values. Adapting to this system on the fly is interesting, thus I can't agree with a suggestion to make it fixed and reliable.
Honestly the way you make it sound is amazing, but your optimism on this matter is actually exceedingly unreal. Regarding your TL;DR: There are NO mindgames involved with the new dragons, teams just take whatever dragon (EVEN in LCS) and OCCASIONALLY it synergises in some way. I dont see how it is "fun" when a team would lose significant advantages only because the exactly wrong dragons spawned, thus heavily favouring one team. I understand your point, you misunderstand me when you think I dislike the variety of the buffs and the strategical implementation. Just the fact that strategically, the dragons are NOT a reliable objective, DEMOTIVATES even the best players to play around them. THAT is why we havent seen dragon fights return.
Father Tios (EUNE)
: Different comps adapt differently. Well duh. Point being that for example an ocean dragon would be really good against and on a poke comp. However if they gain a wind drake, which isn't their primary stat, it makes them better at something else they're aren't as good at originally. Giving them more options to expand the strengths of their comp. allowing them to play it differently. While AGAINST them it could also be used, expanding the opponents ways of playing against a specific comp. Same goes for all the dragons, but in different ways. The way it currently works, requires the players to be creative in the usage of the buffs. This opens the game up for more strategic diversity and creativity.
With no intention of being offensive, you show great lack of understanding the game and you bend logic so that it suits your opinion. You misunderstand two major concepts here. Acquiring a buff you synergise with doesnt just "add" to that bonus, it acts as a multiplier making you exponentially strong, while another drake would make you stronger at something you often **dont even need**. If you think this current drake system requires players to be creative with the buffs then you havent played much League, or if you did see that, please give me a viable example because I would truly like to hear one. Also, this post wasnt about complaining about creativity and diversity, but unreliability and thus strategic deprioritisation.
: > [{quoted}](name=scILyfe,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=U6cAR735,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2016-07-06T21:02:42.382+0000) > > It is not fine. Different comps and champions adapt very differently to the disparate buffs. Which would readily amount to no difference at all because, say, if the red dragon was always the first, we will see team firstpicking champions that are able to immediatly capitalize on that. And we will probably see dragon fights at minute 3 and people going like "ok we lost first dragon our team is useless without it open mid"...
It would certainly affect the meta but youre looking at it in an extremely one-sided and dull manner. By that logic, I could also say that with the addition of Rift Herald that would completely unbalance the game because you just immediately fight for it to give your top laner a 20 minute long advantage in lane. Worked out fine, didnt it?
Silisa (EUNE)
: > Therefore there is a pure luck factor in this concept, which wasnt meant to be in the first place. Yesterday, in one of my games, the Ocean Dragon was the first one. So, my ADC and I worked extra hard to be the dominant duo in our lane so that we could contest if not take that Dragon without opposition. And we did. The next Dragon was Wind, which we did not care much about - useful, but nothing to fall all over ourselves for. So we rotated to other lanes and spread our attention to the rest of the map, in order to use our team's overall advantage. Our jungler ended up taking it on his own, since we were so ahead that nobody could fight him for it. Which Dragon spawns is luck. What you do about it is tactic.
Dragons are supposed to synergise with certain comps and playstyles. This inevitable creates scnerios, where certain teams will benefit much more from a dragon than another team, regardless of how they "adapt" to the situation. In a worst case or best case scenario, this could create extremely uneven chances for teams. The new system is good, but it could be a lot better
: ever heard of '' We want every game to be different '' Random dragon does that and every dragon is good besides cloud drake no problem here
If you dont read what I am talking about, and if you dont even understand what this is about or why the system COULD be a lot better, then dont write your opinion claiming there is "no problem".
TTekkers (EUW)
: At first I was sceptical, but I've come round to it - currently the strategic decisions are made in game making every game different instead of reverting to D1 being OP, D2 being meh, D3 being average and D4 being good but who can really be bothered with 4 drakes?
They are made in game but basic concepts are prepared before: Laneswaps, Objective accumulation, vision control..
: Actually it enforces a specific type of strategy... adaptation, you know the saying "no plan survives first contact with the enemy" this is what it means. In league you have to change your game plan to react to the changing environment, this could he match ups, who is getting fed, or which objectives are available... by having dragons be random you force people to adapt, they can't go into a game knowing when to prioritize dragons or not they have to adapt to which ones are available... if there is one that either team wants your timetable gets pushed up to prioritize these dragons, alternatively it's more acceptable to sacrifice less wanted dragons for other objectives... these random spawns dictate how you will want to play the game and the team which adapts to this new variable first will come out victorious, a feature of league which has always existed and is only further getting enforced. And a predictable spawn can cause balance issues, remember that certain dragons are more useful at certain times and to certain comps, so your going to want a comp which fits this dragon curve the best... this narrows down the meta to specific comps which spike at the right time to take full advantage of the order of the Dragon spawns... So by having it random you don't polarize the champion pool for minimal downside.
Uggghhhh.... this is so tough, because you obviously just try to bend your perception of logic so that it suits the opinion you want to hold. First of all, this "adaptation" is randomised, because different teams require different drakes, different comps and champs benefit WAY more from certain drakes than others, and regardless of "adaptation", this will always make it be dependent on LUCK. Youre then trying to justify everything by essentially saying: "Well, if everything is random and no team has a certain advantage, we balance everything!" That perception is plainly wrong, remember the last time Riot tried to make everything OP? We had a TRIO top lane meta at MSI, something that we have never seen in competetive LoL in the last 3 years. That is when you try to make "everything OP and thus viable". Randomised spawns favour certain comps and champions more than others, and THAT is unbalanced. The purpose of Dragons was to add a STRATEGICAL VALUE to the game, where the different effects would help different teams in the way THEY NEEDED TO. This would not only encourage teams to acquire these drakes, but also to DENY them. Now its just a random mess where, yes it IS better than the old system, but it completely defies the innovative, enrichening concept of the new Dragons. Dragon fights have not returned, for good reason, and teams just take WHATEVER dragon, if they have the time, not even thinking about the strategical impact of that action.
: Only thing i'm sure: the current sytem is way better than the old one, where first dragon was pretty much mandatory and the other ones where just "win more" objectives, including the fifth, which was more for show than anything else. If a team have snowballed so hard to be able to get 4 dragons, it's high likely that this team could have just as easily walk in the enemy base and be done with it. The air dragon seems meh, until you consider that: 1. One way or the other, one dragon will be considered the weaker. So it's useless to bother so much about that. 2. Movement speed, even if out of combat, is understimated because it's not a flashy thing and does not involve damage. But IT IS important. More than anyone can imagine.
Well 1: Yes, its better than the old one, but that was mainly because the old system was terrible balanced. Remember, I did NOT say that the concept and the intentions of the new system are bad, in fact, I think they are very good and would enrich strategic play. What I do find BAD is the implemention of the system. I think its lazy, illogica, and it just devalidates the intentions of the system in the first place. With this random system, teams dont even WANT to depend on buffs when they draft their comp. In game, they just take the drakes as standardised objectives, HOPING that the one they get, benefits them in some way. The point you make about cloud drake is just dumb, to say that "well you can never have perfect balance so who cares if its unbalanced". The drake is just terrible and I am really tired of people trying to defend it, when it has so little impact and usage in the game, especially in comparison to the other ones. Defending Riot at its finest with "imagination" as you call it.
Father Tios (EUNE)
: The current system works just fine. It rewards you for being able to adapt to the buffs you gain.
It is not fine. Different comps and champions adapt very differently to the disparate buffs. Therefore there is a pure luck factor in this concept, which wasnt meant to be in the first place. The new drakes were intended to give strategical value to a team, without letting them snowball too much with generic buffs or gold. NON-GENERIC, TEAM-specific BUFFS. Teams now only take whatever drake is up as a standardised objective, while doing other drakes only to let the one spawn that they actually need. I find it hard to believe how you could possible describe that as "fine".
Rioter Comments
LA Losty (EUW)
: I never said that Riot was right and i did say that there were problems. How about you actually read what i write in the future, before you start posting. Its like talking to a door, if you cant have a proper argument without acting like an 6 year old, then dont post on the boards, how incompetent is it possible to be. I wont respond to future comments, i dont feel like wasting my time with someone as incredibly immature as you.
I know you think you're right similar to the way you think about me. The only difference is, is that you only came here to argue. Your points have no real weight and your arguments are either irrelevant or opinionated. I wrote this post not so somebody could tell me "Well I think its different because I think so and thats my impression". That is the reason for which I responded so coldly to you. Your intentions in this post are by no means to nurture a proper discussion, but to straight up just disagree with somebody: "Some players might dislike the changes but i dont think League is dying in any way. If you dont like the game anymore, what on earth is the point of playing it?". What an argument, asking me why I play the game when my very intention with this post is to restore the game I and many, MANY others once loved, to its prior state. Also your argument before, with the logic that if players dont play Ranked because the system is bad, its the players fault, still makes me cringe. If you cant even admit to that genuine flaw in your logic then there is just no point in arguing. If you do however argue only for the sake of arguing, you should consider Reddit as a platform for your needs. Your attitude is honestly not welcome here.
LA Losty (EUW)
: Where exactly did i insult you? I did not. Also there isnt much point in argueing with you as you label what you are saying as the truth without even listening to other arguments, youre wasting my time, so stop replying to me, you are the only one keeping this conversation going, think before you talk please.
You lack the competence of admitting when youre wrong :) Keep defending Riot, youre completly right, DynQ is absolutely unproblematic and League dying STATISTICALLY is only a coincidence ;)
LA Losty (EUW)
: You too, now kindly stop replying to me.
If you cant read and comprehend my points, if youre only here to defend Riot for whatever reason with no real arguments, if youre only here to, eventually, be insultive; then dont use the forums, go to reddit, that would suit you better. Also, nice irony how you commented almost every comment here, whilst telling me I should stop replying to YOU.
Owyn (EUNE)
: I think he just wants to say that too much words have been spoken already about dynQ and all for nothing, it's just sad and enraging that nothing gets through to Riot, so there's barely any point in discussions atm.
Show more

FeS ScILyfe

Level 146 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion