PhreakRiot

Originally posted by Phr33k101

Phreak actually said that stats disprove this. According to one of his patch breakdowns, toplane having an advantage very early is a good indicator of which team will win, but if that advantage develops midgame or later then it actually has little impact on overall winrate. Instead, any of the other roles getting a lead in the midgame or later is a better indicator for overall winrate than top. So, unless you are absolutely dominant in toplane from the get-go, you probably are not going to be a 1v9 machine anymore, and everyone else having a lead is going to be more important than you.

Originally posted by relrax

Explanation is pretty simple:
Riot wants strong but not op carry toplaners at worlds. The fastest way to get balance to where you want it, is to overshoot, go back some amount and from there take smaller and smaller balance changes to push into desired direction.

If riot buffs aatrox by a really small amount for 5 patches, he might not even be strong enough for worlds meta.

Originally posted by WoonStruck

I agree its small.

I just remember being incredibly disappointed a few years ago by the Rioter who said it would be cool if Horizon Focus amplified Vel'Koz true damage, and it clearly being approved since items, which didn't amplify true damage before, now amplify true damage.

I was simply wondering where broad stances on something like that landed now.

Originally posted by WoonStruck

If someone were to identify said rules, where do you think they would land on true damage interactions?

More specifically, the fact that items can now arbitrarily amplify true damage with % damage increase, but items with % damage reductions cannot likewise reduce true damage.

Would it be best to remove itemized % increases to true damage, or allow itemized % reductions to affect true damage? All logic points to the former.

That seems like a huge conceptual design flaw. I can't imagine there's consistent logic in allowing one and not the other.

Originally posted by TetBoyzzz

Yeah, I get that. This was more to do with the language used and the way some information is presented.

I went into detail about the minion champs as an example of how many responses someone might have to a statement like "Smite should not do full damage to players minions". I don't think I made that clear enough though so that's on me.

One of the big reasons statements like "this should xxxxx" or "xxxxx is never correct" are super off putting for me is that it sounds a lot like the balance whiners (for lack of a better term) that just complain about everything they lose to. A lot of the poorly informed player base with no knowledge on game balance will often say stuff like "xxxxx champion shouldn't be able to do that" or something similar.

I completely get not being able to discuss every change in detail (especially when you make patch rundowns that do exactly that already), but I think you can't throw out statements like "this interaction shouldn'...

Originally posted by MachoMelon11

Makes me wonder if they'll ever add deep water to Summoners rift

Originally posted by WoonStruck

Did you guys make cleaver and stuff work vs pets, since you said you want pets to have the same interactions as champions?

You should probably do a sweep of all champion-only effects and make them affect champions AND pets if you want the interactions to match up.

Originally posted by Lysandren

No one is arguing that pen shouldn't work against pets. I'm just pointing out that it rings false to claim that she will be stronger after lvl 14, when you had not considered that the enemy team can build to ignore resistances, but they can't build to ignore hp.

Personally, I hate playing into Yorick, so feel free to leave her squishy. :)

Originally posted by ADeadMansName

If that is the case, just remove smite from being used on pets all together to prevent misclicks there. You could also remove smite from minions except canons and super minions, because you never smite a melee/caster minion.

And you could even remove smite from minions all together, because it is an old interaction and mostly used to defend against baron buffed minions or super minions. It would lower the influence of junglers in a way that most players don't really care about.

One last question: Is the summoned RH a pet or a monster? And is the intention to keep smite working on it or not?

Originally posted by TetBoyzzz

I'm a huge fan of the transparency that you and the Riot balance team have with the playerbase, but one thing that's always irked me was the use of words like "should" and "shouldn't" when talking about a competitive game.

The decisions made are completely based on the design choices of the person(s) in charge, which is fine (and unavoidable); but claiming that the decisions are made because that's how they should be comes across pretty poorly.

Smite should not do full damage nor intermediate damage to players’ minions

Why not? I'm guessing cause it's a one button way to cut down minion champions' damage that costs basically nothing and is limited to one player on each team - could be way off but that seems like the most likely thought process.

But then why shouldn't the minion player have to account for this? Knowing that a jungle gank is more effective on them since their damage (and therefore ability to...

Read more

Originally posted by B3ER

Will the tooltip communicate that smite doesn't do full damage against pets? Because exhausting Soraka is a fine analogy up until the point where the summoner spell is consistent with the description given along all units it can target.

This game has too many things that are the way they are without anything that communicates it. Don't add more. And no, patch notes don't count. They only suffice as communication for the small percentage of players that bother reading them.

Originally posted by killtasticfever

You didn't really answer the question.

Why didn't you make them unsmiteable? smiting a pet for 100 dmg is a joke. Not to mention a ton of players don't thoroughly scan patch notes and will end up smiting them and being frustrated.

Originally posted by Lysandren

Except by that point the enemy has pen items, so she's weaker still.

In fact most Flat pen mages are going to be doing true damage to the maiden anyway, because you can get so much flat pen so easily with just 3 items.

Originally posted by Regulargrr

I had a three Taric/Jax teams lobby. That poor 4th team.

Originally posted by RobDaGinger

Maiden HP changes just further incentivize lethality hit and run builds which are probably the most annoying ones to play against. Otherwise Maiden (and Yoricks whole power) is too susceptible to dying during extended fights.

Also he just feels horrible without Maiden and she has half the health late game so….yay.

Originally posted by Kordben

Hey. A bit off topic but how Azir look like within your database?

Is he getting closer to the nerf angle ? His presence in pro is ever increasing.

I love the champ and it's state and I'm worried we are going back to the dark middle age :D

Originally posted by Regulargrr

The rare Taric unbanned lobby where everyone goes Taric instantly...

Originally posted by Caenen_

I'm not sure if Smite should always only deal a fraction of the health bar of even "small" pets like Heimer's Q turret or Shaco's box, though. I think at that level of damage it'll just feel dissatisfying for the caster (the anti-pattern here is that you're associating to use the spell that instantly bursts minions, but it does very little instead). If you can't combine it with ~an attack or spell to finish the unit off, what's the point of using the powerful cooldown?

What is the argument against giving it the exclusion for targeting minion_summons?

Originally posted by Praius

they know they're overbuffing, they want you to feel enticed to pick the new overbuffed character, they state it themselves, they push things over the edge to make people notice the champs.