League of Legends!

[Baron Corm]

Does anyone play this game? In the last few weeks I've gotten rather hooked. I think I've actually seen some familiar names while playing so I think there are some of you out there.

If anyone wants to play with me, just add Baron Corm as a friend. Probably a good idea to post here as well so that I know to accept you. If we could get a GitP 5-man going that would be pretty sweet.

For anyone who doesn't know what League of Legends is, it's a completely free game which you should download right now. It's basically an easier/more casual form of DotA, but doesn't require Warcraft to play. You can download it here (http://www.leagueoflegends.com/).

For a shameless League-related plug, look to my signature.

[Milskidasith]

I'm here. Ryze, Amumu, and Yi are my favorites so far. I saw you with your summoner suggestion thing, IIRC.

[Temet Nosce]

Old beta tester who used to play religiously, but got increasingly disinterested as I realized higher level play really broke down and quit playing back around launch. Numbers matter in this game, because there's an absolute cap on how far a single skilled player can carry a game. Beyond that though, hero choice is so important in this game that many people can predict a win/loss just off selection in any game above level 10.

Also, Morgana (bloody shield). Hate. Morgana. There's a reason she's banned in tournaments.

[Joran]

My friends and I have started playing quite a bit. It's a fun game, although the games do drag on at about 30-40 minutes per game.

Does anyone know if auras affect the hero himself or just the ones around him?

I looked at your team composition. I play mainly Alistar. I haven't tried the Innervating Locket, but I usually find the Chalice of Harmony to be better early game, especially with magic heavy users. Alistar really needs a good amount of mana regen.

By the time you can get Innervating Locket, it isn't as great as other items.

So, usually, I go with:

Chalice of Harmony: Mana Regen + Magic Resist
Boots: Depends on the opponent; I'll go with the Ninja Tabi boots for dodge against melee opponents, Mercury's Treads for even more magic resistance, or Berserker's Greaves if I need to do damage.
Sheen: Alistar casts his Triumphant Roar almost every 3 seconds. This is a gigantic damage boost for him and bashing towers.

Then it's a toss up depending on party makeup. I usually go for Phage, but I can get Banshee's Veil if there's a magic heavy army.

For a team build, we ran into an Amumu + Fiddlesticks + Morgana combo yesterday. It was devastating, especially since we have a lot of melee champions. We haven't quite figured out how to deal with AoE stun then AoE damage yet.

[Inhuman Bot]

Yes, I've played it, and still do so occasionally.

To my eternal shame, I'd say I prefer DotA.

However, I do play it still as I said, and go by Anatharon there too.

[Baron Corm]

I'm here. Ryze, Amumu, and Yi are my favorites so far. I saw you with your summoner suggestion thing, IIRC.

Ah, I was wondering if that was you. Sort of a unique name. The argumentation style really gave it away though.


Old beta tester who used to play religiously, but got increasingly disinterested as I realized higher level play really broke down and quit playing back around launch. Numbers matter in this game, because there's an absolute cap on how far a single skilled player can carry a game. Beyond that though, hero choice is so important in this game that many people can predict a win/loss just off selection in any game above level 10.

Also, Morgana (bloody shield). Hate. Morgana. There's a reason she's banned in tournaments.

Morgana and Rammus are currently the two I'm best with. Why would she be banned in tournaments when her ultimate can be completely negated by Mercury's Treads? I found this extremely frustrating while playing as her. Currently can't right now until I get 1000 more IP since she rotated out of the free heroes... and I bought Warwick to great disappointment.


Does anyone know if auras affect the hero himself or just the ones around him?

They do affect the hero himself as well. If not they'd be pretty underpowered. You have to watch the wording though, because most only function on other champions, while some, like the Aegis of the Legion, work on minions too. I always get that as Rammus for awesome pushing.


I looked at your team composition. I play mainly Alistar. I haven't tried the Innervating Locket, but I usually find the Chalice of Harmony to be better early game, especially with magic heavy users. Alistar really needs a good amount of mana regen.

Well, you could go either Mana Manipulator or Catalyst to start, since it's made up of those two. They're pretty good for getting mana back. The Chalice is of course an option, really up to you. I also think the Locket is a bit too expensive for what it is, so I'd only really get it on Alistar because of his spammable heal.


For a team build, we ran into an Amumu + Fiddlesticks + Morgana combo yesterday. It was devastating, especially since we have a lot of melee champions. We haven't quite figured out how to deal with AoE stun then AoE damage yet.

Like I said above, Mercury's Treads go a long way here. If you Cleanse or something out of Amumu's, or just wait it out, it's easy enough to run away from the rest. Morgana's ultimate doesn't stun you or deal damage the second time if you have the Treads.

[Milskidasith]

Don't the treads just lower the time, not negate it?

Anyway, I'm having great fun playing Ryze in randoms now. I go full AP and can spike anything but tanks to death fairly easilly, and even tanks go down if I ever get my Zhonya's ring. Plus, I'm credit to team because I make getting kills easy with my stun.

Granted, my stun is my only CC, but hey, from level 1 to level 18, you can always have another buddy there to bash somebody (level 2 is usually when I get an early gank against dumb people, because at that level stun + ignite + lighting bolt thing [Q skill] is pretty absurd in damage, especially since with the mastery for ignite I get a little AP boost after using it.

[Temet Nosce]

Morgana and Rammus are currently the two I'm best with. Why would she be banned in tournaments when her ultimate can be completely negated by Mercury's Treads? I found this extremely frustrating while playing as her. Currently can't right now until I get 1000 more IP since she rotated out of the free heroes... and I bought Warwick to great disappointment.

As previously mentioned, her shield. It's a single skill which with a semi competent player can completely negate an enormous group of skills/heroes (particularly carries). The worst part is perhaps that it removes things which are already affecting the target, making it effective even if the player is late in applying it. Although her AoE is nice combined with the ever popular group stun tactics (Malphite is very synergistic with her).

Warwick is a jungler, he's quite good on that map they were beta testing when I quit (Twisted Treeline I think?) and useful even in the normal map. Still, why did you buy him if you hadn't played him yet? He's not for everyone certainly.

[Milskidasith]

Is Ryze used in tournaments at all? With his stun, he can't be terrible, and he can do massive AoE damage in a team battle, but he doesn't really have any CC besides that.

[Astrella]

It doesn't really appeal to me (I don't really like this particular style of cartoony graphics). I prefer Heroes of Newerth myself since I like both the gameplay and graphics of that one more.

And the fact that you have to pay for the more interesting stuff, thereby creating a gap in what different players can do, doesn't make it better.

[Moklok]

It doesn't really appeal to me (I don't really like this particular style of cartoony graphics). I prefer Heroes of Newerth myself since I like both the gameplay and graphics of that one more.

And the fact that you have to pay for the more interesting stuff, thereby creating a gap in what different players can do, doesn't make it better.

Only thing that absolutely requires money is different hero skins, and boosts to your XP/IP. Skins dont affect gameplay even one bit. XP boosts kinda affect the gameplay for the moment but wont matter once everyone is 30. Same with IP boosts.

[Astrella]

What are IP points if I may ask?

[Baron Corm]

As previously mentioned, her shield. It's a single skill which with a semi competent player can completely negate an enormous group of skills/heroes (particularly carries). The worst part is perhaps that it removes things which are already affecting the target, making it effective even if the player is late in applying it. Although her AoE is nice combined with the ever popular group stun tactics (Malphite is very synergistic with her).

I suppose at my ELO there aren't enough scary people for me to neutralize that I would notice its power. Or people just don't use debuffs near me that often *shrug*.


Warwick is a jungler, he's quite good on that map they were beta testing when I quit (Twisted Treeline I think?) and useful even in the normal map. Still, why did you buy him if you hadn't played him yet? He's not for everyone certainly.

Well, I wanted to jungle with him. The idea of having two solo lanes made me feel like playing Warwick would be awesome for any team. Then I discovered it's very hard to jungle with him before level 30. Once I get a full rune book maybe I'll pick him up again.

[Temet Nosce]

I suppose at my ELO there aren't enough scary people for me to neutralize that I would notice its power. Or people just don't use debuffs near me that often *shrug*.

Even at low ELO Morgana should be great (albeit not game breaking the way she is at high), she should easily hold a lane against multiple opponents and score an occasional kill when they get frustrated.


Well, I wanted to jungle with him. The idea of having two solo lanes made me feel like playing Warwick would be awesome for any team. Then I discovered it's very hard to jungle with him before level 30. Once I get a full rune book maybe I'll pick him up again.

Eh, they had Runes disabled for a month or two there and he was fine. If you're having trouble with the other team ambushing you - yeah fair point (going around jungling against a competent team hurts), but the actual mechanics of killing the creep camps shouldn't be that hard. If you need help ask your teammates to assist you in getting the Lizard buff early on.

[Milskidasith]

What are IP points if I may ask?

In game cash. Unless you decide you want to buy every hero (which you never will), you get enough IP as you level up (up to 30) to get all the runes (the passive increases) you need, and a hero or two, depending on the price;heroes range from 450 (three or so games, at most, if you win), to 6150 (a lot more.)

[Baron Corm]

Even at low ELO Morgana should be great (albeit not game breaking the way she is at high), she should easily hold a lane against multiple opponents and score an occasional kill when they get frustrated.

I haven't played her in a while so maybe I don't remember well. I recently had about 2600 IP but got bored of waiting and bought Zilean. He's pretty fun though.


Eh, they had Runes disabled for a month or two there and he was fine. If you're having trouble with the other team ambushing you - yeah fair point (going around jungling against a competent team hurts), but the actual mechanics of killing the creep camps shouldn't be that hard. If you need help ask your teammates to assist you in getting the Lizard buff early on.

Just played a game with Milskidasith. The Teemo on our team helped me to get golem buff early on, and neither of us lost much life at all. The only problem is, he accidentally got the buff. Same thing happened with the lizard. So jungling as Warwick is hard at a lower level for a variety of reasons.

[Temet Nosce]

I haven't played her in a while so maybe I don't remember well. I recently had about 2600 IP but got bored of waiting and bought Zilean. He's pretty fun though.

Never liked playing Zilean, loved having him on my team though (Mmm, EXP).


Just played a game with Milskidasith. The Teemo on our team helped me to get golem buff early on, and neither of us lost much life at all. The only problem is, he accidentally got the buff. Same thing happened with the lizard. So jungling as Warwick is hard at a lower level for a variety of reasons.

Yeah, that's not "hard", that's "Teemo screwed up." (unfortunately, bad teammates will lose you more games than anything else). Also, what are you taking as your first skill and summoner spells? It should be the lifesteal hit thing (I forget the name), Smite, and Rally.

[Brother Oni]

There was some discussion about LoL in the old Demigod thread before it got derailed into a Supreme Commander discussion. :smallbiggrin:

I'm getting the hang of the game, although I'm far off the best. How do you calculate your ELO anyway?


Edit: I just realised I play on the European servers - I take it almost everyone here plays on the US ones?

[Joran]

There was some discussion about LoL in the old Demigod thread before it got derailed into a Supreme Commander discussion. :smallbiggrin:

I'm getting the hang of the game, although I'm far off the best. How do you calculate your ELO anyway?

My friends used to play Demigod, now they all switched over to LoL. One person may be making the jump to Heroes of Newerth. Seriously, do we need 3 DotA type games in a year?

[Temet Nosce]

My friends used to play Demigod, now they all switched over to LoL. One person may be making the jump to Heroes of Newerth. Seriously, do we need 3 DotA type games in a year?

Considering how bad they all are? I'd actually like another AoS (Aeon of Strife, the actual term for the genre). HoN is particularly terrible though if you were considering trying it.

[chiasaur11]

Well, Valve's going to make one of these according to rumor, so that'll be good.

Probably.

[Inhuman Bot]

Well, Valve's going to make one of these according to rumor, so that'll be good.

Probably.

The bad news is that IceFrog is working on it. :smalltongue:

[Narazil]

I play it. A lot. Got into it like a week ago, haven't been able to put it down since.
Honestly think it's a shameful load of fun.

Twitch for life, yo. :smallcool:

[Temet Nosce]

One of you gives hope and the other smashes it upon the rocks. :smallfrown:

Honestly, I wasn't even that fond of old DotA (more of an AoM, Ao6, LoLII, LoE, etc fan) but the new version Icefrog writes? Keep it away. Keep it far, far away.

[Narazil]

There was some discussion about LoL in the old Demigod thread before it got derailed into a Supreme Commander discussion. :smallbiggrin:

I'm getting the hang of the game, although I'm far off the best. How do you calculate your ELO anyway?


Edit: I just realised I play on the European servers - I take it almost everyone here plays on the US ones?
Figured I'd mention I'm European aswell. Always up for a match, though I'm still low level and stuff.

[Inhuman Bot]

One of you gives hope and the other smashes it upon the rocks. :smallfrown:

Honestly, I wasn't even that fond of old DotA (more of an AoM, Ao6, LoLII, LoE, etc fan) but the new version Icefrog writes? Keep it away. Keep it far, far away.

I'm sorry. :smallfrown:
I honestly don't find too much to be wrong with DotA. It's a decent enough map, nothing sensational, but not horrible.


In other news, after playing LoL for a bit more, I'm starting to grow on it a little. :smalltongue:

[Temet Nosce]

I'm sorry. :smallfrown:
I honestly don't find too much to be wrong with DotA. It's a decent enough map, nothing sensational, but not horrible.


In other news, after playing LoL for a bit more, I'm starting to grow on it a little. :smalltongue:

Assuming you mean old DotA I agree, I didn't mind it. The only thing that really bothered me about it was how much it got obsessed over (it was a good game, not a great game). The modern one however, manages to be inferior in almost every aspect (even after stealing things from other maps - something Icefrog admittedly publicly) but is still completely full of itself (and the player base is a nightmare).

Eh, LoL only really breaks down if you take it seriously. With casual play you'll be amused.

[Inhuman Bot]

Assuming you mean old DotA I agree, I didn't mind it. The only thing that really bothered me about it was how much it got obsessed over (it was a good game, not a great game). The modern one however, manages to be inferior in almost every aspect (even after stealing things from other maps - something Icefrog admittedly publicly) but is still completely full of itself (and the player base is a nightmare).

Eh, LoL only really breaks down if you take it seriously. With casual play you'll be amused.

I don't think there's anything wrong with modern DotA either, really. The player base is horrible, but that's not the map's fault.

[Zovc]

I like playing as Soraka (spelling?), but apparently she sucks.

[Brother Oni]

Soraka is only bad in the sense that she's almost a pure support hero. Partner her up with the right hero and hope your opponents don't have too many stuns and she can be a right pain in the arse as she keeps the real threats alive.

[Temet Nosce]

Yeah, pretty much. I've only premade with one person who favored her (and he was rarely around), but I've seen some other premades who were really well meshed use her (goes well with a melee team). Don't play her outside of a premade though.

[Milskidasith]

What are the problems you have with the design intent of LoL, Temet?

[Temet Nosce]

What are the problems you have with the design intent of LoL, Temet?

It's designed with casual players in mind rather than more serious ones (surrender, low power disparity based on feeding, etc) and with the idea that one player should be unable to carry a whole team. Further, (while not really a design intent) the ELO system is a complete wreck that will frequently (ok, always) cause absurd teamups between one good person (or a premade) and a bunch of completely useless players to fill out the team then have the other team be of their "average" ELO (which is actually artificially high since premades get a buff to their ELO) causing a ridiculous matchup (which, whether they win or lose will cause an artificial fluctuation away from the right ELO for someone). Lets be honest in fact, there are basically no reasonable matchups due to the way the system is designed.

My hatred of their matchup system aside, the game itself rubs me the wrong way since grouping up is an essentially undefeatable tactic (at high levels, you do not go places solo, ever) and one which relies not on skill but on hero choice... If you ever see a group containing Malphite, Amumu, Morgana, and the teams choice of any other high tier heroes (I was gonna list em but I'm to lazy - and they're probably still easily available on the LoL forums) just assume you've lost unless you're using a similarly pure high tier group.

[Milskidasith]

It's designed with casual players in mind rather than more serious ones (surrender, low power disparity based on feeding, etc) and with the idea that one player should be unable to carry a whole team.

I agree with the Elo... but all of the other things you listed are good things. The casual player intent only got rid of the bad things from DotA (Denying, such an absurd focus on last hitting you don't AA to except to last hit, the fact that pushing isn't a tactic that simply gets your team a loss because it feeds the enemy last hits, etc.). The low power disparity based on feeding simply isn't true; the team that wins the initial dragon 5v5 (in competitive matches) will pretty much win the game, always. Yes, there isn't a huge slippery slope in casual matches when somebody dies early enough, but I don't see why designing the game so that it should be decided by minute five and force all players to waste 30 minutes of the game on a lame duck push is a good thing. The surrender... what's your problem with it? I don't see how you can be in favor of making a system so that getting killed forces a huge power disparity that is impossible to overcome, yet are against a system that allows the losers to spend their time doing something besides putting up token resistance.


My hatred of their matchup system aside, the game itself rubs me the wrong way since grouping up is an essentially undefeatable tactic (at high levels, you do not go places solo, ever) and one which relies not on skill but on hero choice... If you ever see a group containing Malphite, Amumu, Morgana, and the teams choice of any other high tier heroes (I was gonna list em but I'm to lazy - and they're probably still easily available on the LoL forums) just assume you've lost unless you're using a similarly pure high tier group.

Yes, 5v5 grouping is big. I agree it could use a tweak where you get, rather than a percentage, exponentially less EXP based on how many people are within EXP range (1/2 for two people, 1/4 for three, 1/8 for four, and 1/16 for all five). That way you don't group together in a group of five from the beginning, because you won't be getting any EXP, and splitting up to level is a valid tactic (even if it's just so you can group together later and crush the enemy team with two or three levels worth of EXP).

[Temet Nosce]

I agree with the Elo... but all of the other things you listed are good things.

For you perhaps, but to me they're just repeats of things I tried to avoid in WC3.


The casual player intent only got rid of the bad things from DotA (Denying, such an absurd focus on last hitting you don't AA to except to last hit, the fact that pushing isn't a tactic that simply gets your team a loss because it feeds the enemy last hits, etc.). The low power disparity based on feeding simply isn't true; the team that wins the initial dragon 5v5 (in competitive matches) will pretty much win the game, always. Yes, there isn't a huge slippery slope in casual matches when somebody dies early enough, but I don't see why designing the game so that it should be decided by minute five and force all players to waste 30 minutes of the game on a lame duck push is a good thing. The surrender... what's your problem with it? I don't see how you can be in favor of making a system so that getting killed forces a huge power disparity that is impossible to overcome, yet are against a system that allows the losers to spend their time doing something besides putting up token resistance.

So you're excusing a casual focus based on issues not even related to it? (well, arguably the pushing thing is due to the low power difference) As far as power difference, I'm not talking about Baron buffs (which I agree are totally absurd) but individual player power. A fed character is... not that big of a difference from an unfed one and certainly not a big enough difference to carry their entire team.

As for surrender? You are ruining the game for the winners (and possibly someone on your own team), the moment you click that button. I fought for years against this nonsense on WC3... but LoL has a mechanic treating it like quitting is a legitimate right? It's disgusting pandering to quitters and one of the worst things in LoL.

Also, I don't favor making it impossible to recover just a higher difference between a player who is more skilled and fed and one who is not. I want less forgiveness for mistakes and more reward for being good.


Yes, 5v5 grouping is big. I agree it could use a tweak where you get, rather than a percentage, exponentially less EXP based on how many people are within EXP range (1/2 for two people, 1/4 for three, 1/8 for four, and 1/16 for all five). That way you don't group together in a group of five from the beginning, because you won't be getting any EXP, and splitting up to level is a valid tactic (even if it's just so you can group together later and crush the enemy team with two or three levels worth of EXP).

While not a bad idea per see, it still doesn't solve the basic infeasibility of any other tactic in the long run. Still it would encourage a certain degree of separate sneaking around at high levels (a 2/3 split would probably become the norm).

[Milskidasith]

For you perhaps, but to me they're just repeats of things I tried to avoid in WC3.

Trying to avoid good game design (at least in the sense of making LoL economically feasible and able to get a large enough player base to produce new higher level players) is just bad.




So you're excusing a casual focus based on issues not even related to it? (well, arguably the pushing thing is due to the low power difference) As far as power difference, I'm not talking about Baron buffs (which I agree are totally absurd) but individual player power. A fed character is... not that big of a difference from an unfed one and certainly not a big enough difference to carry their entire team.

Actually, everything I mentioned were things that casuals had trouble with in DotA, because it was so counter-intuitive. Denying was, quite frankly, incredibly stupid and anybody new who hadn't read up on the game would simply feed kills. Autoattacking, which seems reasonable, was again less than useless in DotA. Pushing the towers, which in LoL is a good thing, simply helped the other team in DotA by feeding them last hits. Maybe these things don't seem like ways of making the game newbie friendly, but because they actually make the game's objectives straightforward for newbies, it helps them out a ton.

Baron buffs... I never mentioned them. The game, in high levels, is decided at level 1, in a 5v5 brawl for the dragon (not baron, the other dragon.) If your team loses the fight, it's game over already. If your team doesn't attack and the other team kills the dragon, they get a good chunk of gold and boosted straight to level 2, which rapidly snowballs into a win. This is a bad thing, yes, but even an advantage as small as 130 g and a level is actually enough to win the game; the snowball effect should be smaller, at least for higher level play. There is also an issue where the lower team has the advantage because, being closer to the dragon at level 1, they can pick up both of their neutral monster buffs.

As for fed characters being weak, they aren't. Fed characters are very good in low level play, and in high level play the five man group is so big it's really hard to get somebody fed. Of course they can't carry the whole team, but that's bad design. If one player, due to feeding, does all the work, then four players on his team are going to feel useless. Besides, do you realize just how powerful a character would have to be to 100% carry his team? He'd have to have enough movespeed to kill the enemies if they split up and pushed, enough anti-stuns and healths to not get ganked in a 5v1, and an ability to control all the neutral buffs for his team. That kind of power level is simply absurd, and attempting to give one player that for being carried is just as absurd.

However, I still believe that carries in the middle do have a strong benefit over other characters. They are generally up a massive number of last hits (due to having the solo lane) and up by three or four levels. They can run around ganking anybody in the top and bottom lanes with impunity (in low level play; again, high level play has grouping and more stuns, of course). They have a huge, if not insurmountable advantage. That's a good thing. It rewards highly skilled play, but doesn't lead to an instant lame duck situation where the winner is already decided (in low level play), though it does snowball quickly.


As for surrender? You are ruining the game for the winners (and possibly someone on your own team), the moment you click that button. I fought for years against this nonsense on WC3... but LoL has a mechanic treating it like quitting is a legitimate right? It's disgusting pandering to quitters and one of the worst things in LoL.


Really, this is just hilarious. How can somebody who's ever played a game that doesn't hate the player believe something like that? I have literally NEVER heard a complaint from the winners when I surrender, and I likewise don't care, and I am in fact happy, when the other team surrenders. Do you know why?

Because lame duck situations are not fun. It's as simple as that. Sure, if people are surrendering at 25 for being down one kill and a tower, it's absurd, but it's so easy to vote no that doesn't ever happen. The thing is, I get impatient enough at the 5-10 minutes before the 25 minute mark in a game we've already won that I just want to join one where it's competitive, regardless of if we win or lose. If I'm 12/1/10 (happened in a recent game) with most of my team having similarly high scores, I don't care that the enemy team hasn't lost it's nexus yet, I want them to surrender (They did, actually). It's a waste of time to play when the outcome is decided, whether you are winning or losing.


Also, I don't favor making it impossible to recover just a higher difference between a player who is more skilled and fed and one who is not. I want less forgiveness for mistakes and more reward for being good.


The forgiveness for mistakes is already pretty low in high level play... and by pretty low, I mean whoever gets the dragon or gets the first blood probably has the game, assuming they don't do anything supremely stupid or the random number god doesn't favor one of their characters with a 100% dodge and crit rate.


While not a bad idea per see, it still doesn't solve the basic infeasibility of any other tactic in the long run. Still it would encourage a certain degree of separate sneaking around at high levels (a 2/3 split would probably become the norm).

Well duh. In any team game, focusing your fire is a good idea. Trying to design a game where focused fire isn't the best way to push is like trying to argue that you should design starcraft 2 so that having your units target the enemies evenly is as effective as killing them off one by one with focused fire. It's simply arguing for something that, without a lot of massive design changes, won't happen, and every team game has this issue, to a greater or lesser degree.

[Poison_Fish]

Man, I hit the road to travel home and I miss all this wonderful AoS discussion.

Though, I have to say Temet, for someone who is professing a desire for a more unforgiving competitive AoS, you are sure railing on DotA. As someone who has played DotA very competitively, and I've been in the early betas for both HoN and LoL(and continue to play LoL), DotA still is the least forgiving of the three. Though I admit I actually happen to enjoy DotA the most, I do also enjoy LoL.

The advantage I see with LoL over DotA is specifically the carry issue. Actually, it's two fold with the carry issue. First off, having one character so powerful that he can wipe teams is a bit excessive. Ultimately, an AoS is a team game, and that should be stressed. In low level play I can see that fine, and a single character can wreck a disorganized team (As I often did with Sion or really just about anyone in LoL). But really, it comes down to team battles. I see that as a good thing.

The second benefit I see is partially related to the carry thing. Because of the advent of ability power, caster characters can semi-fill the role of a carry. This makes late game casters extremely viable. Viegar, for instance, happens to be one of my favorite.

I won't deny that LoL is more towards a casual direction then DotA either. This is a good thing however, because 1. while my team and I have been getting good games, I have other friends I want to play with and 2. Because of the generally lower learning curve on LoL and a few other things, friends who previously weren't interested are. In general, I think the AoS model of gameplay is quite fun, it's just been a normally high learning curve. Bringing more people into the fold isn't a bad thing. Also note. There will always be bad players.

[Baron Corm]

Soraka is only bad in the sense that she's almost a pure support hero. Partner her up with the right hero and hope your opponents don't have too many stuns and she can be a right pain in the arse as she keeps the real threats alive.

Actually, if you stack AP, your Starcall will be doing some serious damage, if you spam it at every opportunity. Infuse is a little more underwhelming but it does silence as well. AP also increases the amount you heal, so you're better at supporting too. I think she used to be bad, but she recently got buffed, and I'm always glad when I see one on my team.

As for fed champions being weak... LOL. That's all I have to say. I can't comment on high ELO games since I'm not in them, but in low ELO, one champion tends to dominate the game.

[Milskidasith]

The second benefit I see is partially related to the carry thing. Because of the advent of ability power, caster characters can semi-fill the role of a carry. This makes late game casters extremely viable. Viegar, for instance, happens to be one of my favorite.


AP actually doesn't help casters as much as it does physical carries... there was a good thread on it on the LoL forums, but it basically boiled down to the fact that everything favored melee DPS over AP caster DPS. I mean everything quite literally. Let me list the ways:

You can get more armor penetration than magic penetration using less runes, you can get more attack speed than you can cooldown redux from runes (again, with less runes), you can get more magic defense than physical defense from runes, two very common items boost magic resist and severely nerf casters effects besides "I smack things with spells" (Merc's treads and Banshee's Veil, both very common, Merc's Treads being almost a necessity for movespeed anyway), physical carries actually have good magic resistance growth to help against casters, they can actually kill towers, and in some cases they still have AoE crowd control, albeit at a lesser level than casters, and melee +attack and +attack speed items are cheaper than -cooldown and +AP items after considering that melee items are used way more often than them (max attack speed of almost 3/second compared to casting all of your spells, at best [super cooldown redux ryze] every three seconds). Also, not only do the physical carries have all of that, but their items are all perfectly suited to them! They have +crit, +attack speed, and dodge on one item! Increased crit damage, attack, and crit % on one item! Need magic resist and annoyed by stuns? Get banshees! Compare the fact there are no +dodge items for casters or tanks, and that there are no items that combine high amounts of AP and cooldown reduction for a caster, whereas for melee +attack speed and +attack are staples. Even if the items weren't already skewed towards melee, they are when you consider you need far less different items, and the go to caster item for survivability and power (Rod of Ages) takes a lot of time to fully work.

So, with that huge wall of text out of the way, basically magic DPS simply doesn't work as well as physical DPS, especially because (ignoring using lichbane) they simply can't push towers, and actually do less damage. While they do generally have better CC, that just puts them into the role of a support, not a killer (my AP specced Ryze pubstomps, sure, but no harder than Yi, and with a lot more health problems because he doesn't have lifesteal, which is again, insane for physical DPS but doesn't help for magic.)

So in short: Yes, magical DPS is OK, but it can't do any better than physical, and it's costlier to do it, so at best you can get a very good CC guy with high damage (not that that's a bad role, since CC is such a big part of the game, but they aren't anywhere near carry levels.)

[Poison_Fish]

Oh, I know that. Sion does quite well as an AP/tank or AP/carry. His shield especially benefits. As do a fair number of other physical carry's.

I'm thinking in comparison to dota though, the fact that casters scale alone is a good thing. Most casters late game have less and less effective spells in terms of damage alone, while physical carries continue to scale upward.

[Milskidasith]

Oh, I know that. Sion does quite well as an AP/tank or AP/carry. His shield especially benefits. As do a fair number of other physical carry's.

I'm thinking in comparison to dota though, the fact that casters scale alone is a good thing. Most casters late game have less and less effective spells in terms of damage alone, while physical carries continue to scale upward.

This is true. Casters do scale, and well enough to be useful, just not nearly well enough for an AP carry to beat a physical carry in a slugfest. Compared to DotA, though, it's definitely an improvement.

[Baron Corm]

Case in point, yesterday went something like 14-2-3 with Zilean. Completely destroyed their whole team, they were barely competent. However, I had trouble killing towers, and they had a Tristana and an Ashe. They won easily in the later rounds, even though I could still 1v1 either of their physical carries. If either of their physical carries had gotten a Banshee's Veil, I'm sure I might as well have just stayed in spawn at that point.

[Temet Nosce]

Trying to avoid good game design (at least in the sense of making LoL economically feasible and able to get a large enough player base to produce new higher level players) is just bad.

Yes, because having more customers automatically makes it something enjoyable. I don't particularly care whether or not a casual focus will bring them more customers, it still remains something I'm uninterested in.



Actually, everything I mentioned were things that casuals had trouble with in DotA, because it was so counter-intuitive. Denying was, quite frankly, incredibly stupid and anybody new who hadn't read up on the game would simply feed kills. Autoattacking, which seems reasonable, was again less than useless in DotA. Pushing the towers, which in LoL is a good thing, simply helped the other team in DotA by feeding them last hits. Maybe these things don't seem like ways of making the game newbie friendly, but because they actually make the game's objectives straightforward for newbies, it helps them out a ton.

Yes, because taking the time to work out a few simple things about the game is terribly trying. Still, sure I'm not all that attached to those particular aspects so I'm not really inclined to argue on whether they should be included.


Baron buffs... I never mentioned them. The game, in high levels, is decided at level 1, in a 5v5 brawl for the dragon (not baron, the other dragon.) If your team loses the fight, it's game over already. If your team doesn't attack and the other team kills the dragon, they get a good chunk of gold and boosted straight to level 2, which rapidly snowballs into a win. This is a bad thing, yes, but even an advantage as small as 130 g and a level is actually enough to win the game; the snowball effect should be smaller, at least for higher level play. There is also an issue where the lower team has the advantage because, being closer to the dragon at level 1, they can pick up both of their neutral monster buffs.

Ok, wait what? I have never seen this, Baron buffs are completely game deciding yes. The rest? No. Reverses are relatively common at high ELO (presuming both teams are competent anyways - something not that common), due to Baron and simply pulling back.


As for fed characters being weak, they aren't. Fed characters are very good in low level play, and in high level play the five man group is so big it's really hard to get somebody fed. Of course they can't carry the whole team, but that's bad design. If one player, due to feeding, does all the work, then four players on his team are going to feel useless. Besides, do you realize just how powerful a character would have to be to 100% carry his team? He'd have to have enough movespeed to kill the enemies if they split up and pushed, enough anti-stuns and healths to not get ganked in a 5v1, and an ability to control all the neutral buffs for his team. That kind of power level is simply absurd, and attempting to give one player that for being carried is just as absurd.

Not very, considering many other AoS manage this very thing. Also, it's not bad design it's simply very, very unfriendly design. You either keep up or lose. Not everyone in a game *should* be useful. If you suck, you do not have some divine right to be able to do anything.


However, I still believe that carries in the middle do have a strong benefit over other characters. They are generally up a massive number of last hits (due to having the solo lane) and up by three or four levels. They can run around ganking anybody in the top and bottom lanes with impunity (in low level play; again, high level play has grouping and more stuns, of course). They have a huge, if not insurmountable advantage. That's a good thing. It rewards highly skilled play, but doesn't lead to an instant lame duck situation where the winner is already decided (in low level play), though it does snowball quickly.

As a general rule if playing a carry in a newb island game it's better to roam and gank almost immediately (which will usually result in a very good K/D ratio although your team may lose the game for you anyways), and in high ELO one yes you're gonna be grouped (and one of the less useful members quite likely).

However, fed or not once the enemy stops letting you gank them the power disparity is basically irrelevant it's so low. The tactic mostly works not due to power disparity but due to the screwups of the people being ganked.


Really, this is just hilarious. How can somebody who's ever played a game that doesn't hate the player believe something like that? I have literally NEVER heard a complaint from the winners when I surrender, and I likewise don't care, and I am in fact happy, when the other team surrenders. Do you know why?

Because lame duck situations are not fun. It's as simple as that. Sure, if people are surrendering at 25 for being down one kill and a tower, it's absurd, but it's so easy to vote no that doesn't ever happen. The thing is, I get impatient enough at the 5-10 minutes before the 25 minute mark in a game we've already won that I just want to join one where it's competitive, regardless of if we win or lose. If I'm 12/1/10 (happened in a recent game) with most of my team having similarly high scores, I don't care that the enemy team hasn't lost it's nexus yet, I want them to surrender (They did, actually). It's a waste of time to play when the outcome is decided, whether you are winning or losing.

That's nice, but when you pressed play you agreed to play. Not to quit. You personally may not care whether the game finishes but I (and others) do. By surrendering in a game you're screwing over anyone who actually wants to finish it instead of cutting out halfway through. It's not about the outcome, but enjoying the game.

Admittedly however, the bug where if you don't vote a surrender can never go through does fix this to an extent (although trash players will just AFK if you don't let them quit).


The forgiveness for mistakes is already pretty low in high level play... and by pretty low, I mean whoever gets the dragon or gets the first blood probably has the game, assuming they don't do anything supremely stupid or the random number god doesn't favor one of their characters with a 100% dodge and crit rate.

Yeah, no I already covered this. I suppose it's remotely possible the game has changed enormously since I played but I sincerely doubt it. Still, maybe I'm wrong. There was a lot of complaint on the issue while I played.


Well duh. In any team game, focusing your fire is a good idea. Trying to design a game where focused fire isn't the best way to push is like trying to argue that you should design starcraft 2 so that having your units target the enemies evenly is as effective as killing them off one by one with focused fire. It's simply arguing for something that, without a lot of massive design changes, won't happen, and every team game has this issue, to a greater or lesser degree.

Not really. In LoL it's the only feasible tactic, we aren't talking about there being benefits to focusing fire but on there being literally no point to going around without a group. It also wouldn't be hard to break just increase the by level power disparity (maybe also increase gold per kill) and slash both gold and EXP rewards for being in a group extremely (your suggestion would be a good starting point, albeit maybe not enough). At that point, even in late game people would be leary of grouping up since it'd be possible for a low number of the opposing team to stop them, and it would eat time they could've been grinding and with that fixed AoE grouping would stop being king.

[Milskidasith]

Yes, because having more customers automatically makes it something enjoyable. I don't particularly care whether or not a casual focus will bring them more customers, it still remains something I'm uninterested in.

The casual focus has done nothing wrong, and it's better for both the noncompetitive and competitive scene. Arguing for something you like that would hurt the community doesn't leave you with a good game, and simply isn't reasonable. (much like how I don't like the fact physical carries are so much better than AP carries at DPS, but I don't complain because if they weren't physical really wouldn't have much in the way of uses).



Yes, because taking the time to work out a few simple things about the game is terribly trying. Still, sure I'm not all that attached to those particular aspects so I'm not really inclined to argue on whether they should be included.

These are all changes that were made to be newbie friendly, and yet you say you don't support newbie friendliness? Also, denying and only AAing to last hit and not pushing are all counterintuitive; without a guide, you will NEVER figure those out. It's not figuring out simple things, like that stunning somebody to allow your teammates to gank is good, it's figuring out crazy obscure things that make no sense, like that Lichbane, despite it's text, has no internal cooldown and allows a Ryze to output massively more damage than he should during his ultimate with 500-600+ damage melee attacks between spells hitting an AoE.



Ok, wait what? I have never seen this, Baron buffs are completely game deciding yes. The rest? No. Reverses are relatively common at high ELO (presuming both teams are competent anyways - something not that common), due to Baron and simply pulling back.


The dragon? I've seen it multiple times even in low level play, and heard a ton about it in high level play. It's a huge advantage starting off at level 2 (the top lane, not so much, but the bottom and middle lanes are going to be far stronger than their opponents). If both teams are competent, the game is decided right there.


Not very, considering many other AoS manage this very thing. Also, it's not bad design it's simply very, very unfriendly design. You either keep up or lose. Not everyone in a game *should* be useful. If you suck, you do not have some divine right to be able to do anything.


You already DO have to keep up or lose; having a single feeder will lose you the game, and even being a bit behind snowballs very rapidly. Unfriendly design is bad design; you're already punished for dying by giving the opponent better gear, not levelling up, and not being able to control space, which gives the opponent a huge chance to snowball; why should it be a guarantee that if you die, you're going to be completely useless and the opponents are going to be super buffed?


As a general rule if playing a carry in a newb island game it's better to roam and gank almost immediately (which will usually result in a very good K/D ratio although your team may lose the game for you anyways), and in high ELO one yes you're gonna be grouped (and one of the less useful members quite likely).

This is pretty much admitting carries are more powerful, because... guess what? They do well. That's pretty much what matters, isn't it? Unless you really want the carry to besome kind of god that can solo the entire enemy team, I don't see what your problem is.


However, fed or not once the enemy stops letting you gank them the power disparity is basically irrelevant it's so low. The tactic mostly works not due to power disparity but due to the screwups of the people being ganked.

The power disparity is pretty huge... when I'm fed as Ryze I can kill one enemy with my ultimate and attack, and then the other enemy will be running away because they'll be almost dead from the AoE. Soloing 2v1s is pretty good. Yi is even more scary; if the enemies aren't stunning you multiple times/aren't another carry with a stun, you can rip through three of them in low level play if they are grouped together, and when fed even moderately well I can dive into a group of four of them and kill at least one, assuming they don't all have stuns. If they do, well, Yi's screwed because he's frail, but that's a problem with him, not with carries in general (See: Amumu. Let amumu get carried, and he's impossible to kill, kills you for trying, and stuns your team.)



That's nice, but when you pressed play you agreed to play. Not to quit. You personally may not care whether the game finishes but I (and others) do. By surrendering in a game you're screwing over anyone who actually wants to finish it instead of cutting out halfway through. It's not about the outcome, but enjoying the game.


You know what? I've never heard anybody but you complain about it, and people I asked (because you keep insinuating others share your opinion) said they'd actually ignore all of your opinions immediately if you believed in something like that. Even in the LoL forums, if you read the surrender threads there are about 20 asking people to surrender when it's obviously lost and one complaining about surrendering, which is mostly full of people telling the OP he needs to get over himself. Simply put, you are near completely alone on this issue, and nobody believes what you are saying but you.

Basically, no, the community is not with you, they do not believe that it is wasting other's time to surrender, and they don't enjoy the game even if they are winning a curbstomp. Most people play for a competitive game; if they're winning badly, they want the 25 minute surrender (actually, people are suggesting making it earlier, since games are actually decided earlier than that, contrary to your beliefs, again, that the game is competitive throughout with no penalties for being the loser), so they can get the little bit of bonus IP for a quick victory and leave to play a real match.


Admittedly however, the bug where if you don't vote a surrender can never go through does fix this to an extent (although trash players will just AFK if you don't let them quit).


I like how you insult people who don't believe in your opinion. Also, it's been fixed, AFAIK; I've had plenty of surrenders at 4 and 0.


Yeah, no I already covered this. I suppose it's remotely possible the game has changed enormously since I played but I sincerely doubt it. Still, maybe I'm wrong. There was a lot of complaint on the issue while I played.


In low level play, I can predict the outcome with about 80% certainty from the first 10 minutes, especially if one team has an obviously better composition than the other. The game is decided early, and it snowballs rapidly.



Not really. In LoL it's the only feasible tactic, we aren't talking about there being benefits to focusing fire but on there being literally no point to going around without a group. It also wouldn't be hard to break just increase the by level power disparity (maybe also increase gold per kill) and slash both gold and EXP rewards for being in a group extremely (your suggestion would be a good starting point, albeit maybe not enough). At that point, even in late game people would be leary of grouping up since it'd be possible for a low number of the opposing team to stop them, and it would eat time they could've been grinding and with that fixed AoE grouping would stop being king.

No matter what solution you propose, there's always going to be one dominanting team tactic. If you make grouping so worthless, it might, for example, wind up being solos in all three lanes with junglers standing by to push the towers and gank, or something similar. There's always going to be one tactic that pushes the best and gets the most gold, and that's going to be used.

[Copper8642]

Played, enjoyed, still play, still enjoy.

Use Copper8642 on there too. Mostly use Ryze.

[Poison_Fish]

I'd like the record to stand that the surrender button is a useful tool. There is a reason in pro dota games "FF"(Forfeit) is important. Now, a game isn't always lost. But if you've played enough, you can tell when it's over. Wasting another half hour is no good at that point(though I can say I've had awesome times guarding our world tree/throne for over an hour keeping another team from finishing), but frankly, it's better to start up a new one against either the same team (in scrims and even in regular play) and try again, rather then become a lame duck. Though I certainly don't support surrendering early, and a lot of people do have an itchy "GG" trigger finger. But on the whole, having the mechanic there for the team is good. Frankly, Temet, the only thing I can garner from your arguing is "I want to farm up my items more and get more kills". Your complaining of the lack of power in one character(Such as taking on the whole team) doesn't help with my impression of your approach to this.

I won't deny that LoL lends more to early team shenanigans, but frankly, so does DotA. Always carry a teleport scroll. Someone is being ganked? Your whole team save a few exceptions basically goes down and stops that. I don't see too much difference in upper level dota team play and LoL team play in terms of groups. Remember, it is a team game.

I'll also admit, my favorite times in both LoL and DotA are early game shenanigans. That's where I get my fun(As I tend to play gankers or support, at least with DotA). So I'm fine with recognizing a game is over. I'm quite happy to go back to more early game fun.

[Milskidasith]

In unrelated news to the design arguments, I have been playing an unkillable Cho'gath build centered around last hitting more than anybody realistically should (as in, if I focus I can out-last hit a solo Yi when I'm in the bottom or top lanes), that ends up with over 4k HP and MR and armor in the hundreds, with HP regen somewhere around 160/5 seconds. Basically, I am the toughest to kill tank ever.

First off, get the Regen pendant (475 one), then Warmog's, then Merc's Treads (Both at the same time if you last hit well, since you are really that survivable), then Guardian Angel, Soul Shroud, and Thornmail (order depending on what's troubling you; nukers, get Guardian, getting chased back and slowly being hurt, get Soul Shroud, Carries, get Thornmail). It's expensive to get it all, yes, but just getting Warmog's and one or two of the other items make you into an unkillable god out there. It's fun!

[Inhuman Bot]

I love Cho'gath. He suits my style perfectly. :smallsmile:

I've found myself spiraling down the slippery sloap, and am now half way to permabuying him. :smalltongue:

[Poison_Fish]

Don't forgot to scream "Om nom nom" when chowing doing on enemy players.

[Milskidasith]

Don't forgot to scream "Om nom nom" when chowing doing on enemy players.

Yep. Except if you munch another Cho'gath; then you say "THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!"