I think you caught me in the middle of pulling the changes from the tweet, I usually throw the disclaimer at the top when I'm in the process of that. Regardless I did miss that the Rell armor nerf was bigger, so fixed that.
Thank you for looking it over! :D
Thanks for your service to the community! :)
Was the jungle treat buff moved to another patch or did you guys decided against going through with it?
We ultimately decided that jungle didn't need compensation (initial direction was to give them something back, not necessarily power neutral on whole, though).
Right now, the plan is to find a target for overall early jungle gank power and re-address next patch if we don't hit close to our mark.
Are you going to hit Rells passive min base amount? 3 to 2% doesn't mean much if shes still always stealing 1.25 base.
She has this very same issue on PBE where her % was low but her min was high.
Hey, good call out, that's a complete oversight from me. New minimum is now also nerfed by about 1/3.
Bah, still not worth at all
The item is not weak. It is appropriately powerful on its set of champions.
thoughts on duskblade?
It's an item.
How big is the IE buff idk numbers
Roughly neutral on 2 items, up to 3-4% auto attack DPS nearing full build.
Small corrections:
Not sure about other changes. Might be a couple inaccuracies here and there.
11 pts (RIP Fizz). Great content!
You math it all out with extreme detail except to say "at two items" and not mention any of the other particulars
Because it's not particularly relevant what the two items are, and there's no need to math out every build. Unless you somehow have more than 250 total AD at two items, it's always less than 1 damage per auto increase. From there it's a simple matter of counting the number of autos you need to break even with the AD ratio on your spells and passives.
If there's a problem with this method please explain why, it's certainly more specific than simply asserting 1% spell damage 1% AA dps. I assume those are from some internal aggregated stats.
You do breakeven or come out slightly ahead in cases 600 gold later with a Cloak, yes. Overall it's a buff, I'm not denying that. But at 3 items the buff is still so small it's basically placebo, it's roughly the equivalent of like +3 AD at 3 items. That's why I said it only has marg...
I mean yeah, it's not meant to be a ton of power. It's a very small buff that's primarily feels-driven to a class of champions whose primary output is auto-attack DPS -- a class that is not underpowered, and so does not need significant power.
I'm glad players are reading the changes as exciting and I'm glad the numbers suggest the buff is very small. Both are intended.
I do appreciate your continued discussion.
At 2 items it works out to on avg less than 1 damage per auto, in exchange for 5 AD.
The loss of 5 AD means that even if your spells have no AD ratio but you have Kraken Slayer, it's already a net loss because of just the AD ratio on Kraken Slayer. Factoring spells into it just makes the calculus even worse.
Even if you didn't go Kraken Slayer, taking Caitlyn as an example, you lose 24 damage from Q+R+W on a single target, so you'll need to auto ~24 times to break even at two items. I didn't even factor in headshot's reduced crit multiplier here.
edit: A few more examples: Draven loses out at 2 items and maybe 3 items because Q bonus AD doesn't crit so he loses damage per AA on average. Ashe loses out at 2 and maybe 3 items because Frost Shot, loses out even more if she goes Kraken. Jinx will go Kraken. Twitch is roughly even at 3 assuming no Kraken. Only Samira is in most situations a net gain even at 2 items.
Except you're totally discounting things like leveling up or the components of your third item. You math it all out with extreme detail except to say "at two items" and not mention any of the other particulars. You say "it's 1 damage" and then say "They have AD ratios." That's not how you do math.
Pegging it to example builds, you lose approximately 1% spell damage on high AD ratio champions like Caitlyn and gain more than 1% auto-attack DPS on them, which only grows as they acquire components.
Even if it's technically DPS down in some team fight instances on some champions the instant you finish IE, it's immediately positive 600 gold later when you buy a Cloak.
It's a buff.
Reminder that IE changes are basically placebo with a marginal nerf at 2 items, roughly breakeven at 3, and marginally better at 4.
Your math is wrong. It's a strict buff at 3 and realistically a buff at 2 as well, unless you do nothing but land Q as Caitlyn
The rework wasn’t perfect (nothing ever is) but it absolutely bought us a lot more room.
Let me push back a bit on this point. This implies you can now buff Yuumi, which I'm not sure is true.
She already had to go to this awful winrate to not be omnipresent in pro play.
I agree that the stats are not as bad, but I don't see how the problem has meaningfully changed. Buffing Yuumi now just puts her back in pro play. The conceptual problem remains just as true as it was pre-rework.
Seems to me that without more changes to her mechanics, she will just be rotting in 45% winrate graveyard zone like so many other problem champions before her. Can you elaborate on if that fear is valid?
Last time we tried to kick Yuumi out of pro play she went to 39% win rate. At the very least, consider this a buffed state from where she was in February.
Ideally yeah I'd like a version of Yuumi that was scarce in pro, rewarding for her mains, and approachable for newer League of Legends players. It's also not the most pressing task at the moment.
Wow this rework is such a success! All they had to do was get Yuumi down to 45% soloqueue winrate and she’s finally not a pro staple (but still picked a decent amount)!
I know this is rage baiting but I’ll repeat what I said last time:
At her current state she is resting at the same win rate and 70% lower pro presence than Worlds 2022. That is a meaningful success. The rework wasn’t perfect (nothing ever is) but it absolutely bought us a lot more room.
Read morePros are not good enough to make the judgment calls themselves. They pick trash all the time and dont play good champs for several seasons until one korean guys pulls it out once and then its 'meta' for 5 seasons straight.
In CS:GO, nobody played the SG because it was a 'COD noob gun', then valve buffed it by 300$ (not changing the shooting characteristics of the gun), pros played it, it got nerfed back to the original price, and still pros were crying because the gun was so unfair. Later it got nerfed to death. The gun existed in the op spot for 5 years. In CSGO there are only 2 viable rifles for Ts (economy wise) and they were too stubborn to realize that one of them was op. Pros dont know f**king shit.
Ksante has an 48% wr in pro play and a sub 50% wr in challenger. The champ is not overpowered, he's just flexible and thats it.
And can you please explain why Ksante doesn't win a lot of games in hands of the best players when hes so op?
'Win rate d...
The SG/AUG in CS:GO from ~4 years ago or whatever is just such a great crystallized example for "wow, pros really don't have it all figured out."
IE is already more performant than Galeforce on a large swath of champions. This is the same issue Statikk Shiv has on AD characters: It's good and players are wrong to claim it's weak.
How can you make this claim if you're saying IE shouldn't be built first? That data is not exactly clear, so making this strong claim seems like a pretty questionable choice without any supporting evidence.
Items built second and later are intrinsically represented by significantly higher winrates as a form of survivorship bias. This is generally acknowledged as fact and will be peoples' knowledge going in, unless you wish to showcase why it is not the case here.
Statikk isn't the same at all, considering in many cases statikk is being rushed, unlike IE.
I agree with the IE changes overall, but the optics here are pretty poor.
Practically every public stats site separates win rates by slot. You can find the evidence yourself extremely easily.
but also Silver players can't play Gwen, so 🤷♂️.
it hurts seeing this sort of comment from the official balance team :( Mr. Phreak I wanna play my favourite girl, when I can pick her again without trolling? I wanna go snip...
Quite literally my advice is to get good. Gwen requires a high level of mastery. So go master her.
Compared to champions like Ryze who absolutely require coordination to get maximum value, Gwen is a pretty self-sufficient fighter.
this just makes adc more op in pro play where games last way longer and adcs are able to scale. why not give buffs oriented to soloq instead?
ADC popularity is at its lowest in low MMR, where games go the longest. So giving Iron-Silver players a promise of late game power is pretty reasonable. Also, new toys do a good job of bumping play rate. Both 13.1b and 13.10 spiked bot lane pick rate. The same thing happened with jungle in 12.22
For pro play, I'm more concerned with ensuring carry champions are pro-viable in top and mid. If top lane is a lot of Jax vs. Gwen vs. Rumble vs. Renekton, you'd be hard-pressed to call it an "ADC" meta when Gwen can just solo-kill Aphelios like we saw at MSI. Certainly not a fun experience for many ADC players, but also Silver players can't play Gwen, so 🤷♂️.
Finally, pro players play Challenger solo queue and scrims, both of which are incredibly fast-paced and snowbally on average. I'm sure there will be some degree of "Let's just get 4 item Jinx and then we win," which wouldn't be great. But if she has to face up against 4 item Gwen it probably works itself out.
But tanks tend to have weak lane phase due to how strong they can be in team fights.
Tanks are meant to have an acceptable laning phase so they can play League of Legends in the 1v1 for at least a while.
Any reason you chose to "buff" ie like this instead of say giving it more AD or anything. Or AS or MS to match gale?
The biggest complaint I saw about IE was it was mediocre early. So buffing it's late game and nerfing it's early game doesn't seem like it'll help much unless you just want Galeforce to be the early game crit mythic and IE the late game one... but I could just see it devolving to people buying gale and at 3 items selling it for IE. Or something.
It's a buff.
You shouldn't buy IE first. That's obviously a bad idea for an item that multiplies your other purchases. Most players have thankfully realized that. It's essentially equal on 2nd item and immediately better the instant you buy a component of your third. An item that is always equal or pure upside is a strict buff. You don't need sarcastic air quotes. It's a buff.
IE is already more performant than Galeforce on a large swath of champions. This is the same issue Statikk Shiv has on AD characters: It's good and players are wrong to claim it's weak.
But because they're wrong, it shows up in the patch notes to say, "No really, try it!"
Also ADCs aren't weak. They don't need a significant amount of extra power. But it's good to re-shape them away from Galeforce as the most common mythic. Ironically, pro players are much better about skipping the active item for the power-positive options that already exist.
nice maths. At first glance i assumed it was surely a buff, but i ran them myself and come to the same conclusion. https://i.imgur.com/AWDZAeG.png
If you play soloQ and you don't plan to get to 4 items, don't take the new IE.
And get what? Remember galeforce is getting pretty hard nerfed. I agree now that this isnt really a marksman IE buff, but for champs that only decide between IE and galeforce (e.g. Jhin, Jinx, Aphelios), I think IE will now win out generally.
Also, Yone/Yasuo crit damage is hard coded I think, so I wonder if IE crit modifier will even affect them if they dont also go and change their numbers.
Yasuo and Yone multiply their total crit damage by 90%. Everything that modifies it carries over.
devtrackers.gg
